Mr. ELIOT. The ComCommerce have deemed it to be their duty to offer this bill at this time for the consideration of the House and for their favorable action, and, as they behave, for the promotion of the common welfare. The Constitution of the U.S. empowers it, the pee ile demand it, and the necessities of tllb public require it. We ask for the expenditure of money and we believe that it can be shown that every dollar of appropriation asked for will, ifjndiciously applied, return 3fold into the Treasury of the U.S. lhe time has come when loyal people look to Congress for help in the direction of this bill. During all the war the ComCommerce have persistently refused to report any bill on this subject although pe titions have been before them time and a am and the people have been content; they iave been expending life and treasure to save the life of the potion. The work of war has called them from their homes. That work has been well accomplished and thoroughly and now from every loyal sectioriof the land petitions have come n demanding the action of congress in beha f of works where the highest in ustrial interests of the country are involved. Mr. Speaker, I do not propose at this time to discuss the rightful power of Congress under the Constitution to legislate in this manner. It would seem as though that question ought to be deemed settled. It has been discussed for many years by the ablest men who have represented their various constituencies upon this floor and in the Senate. Whatever theo rists may say, I believe that it is certain that the practical common sense of this country demands and Will receive but one solution. Perhaps, however, I may say, in reporting this bill, thatthe ComCommerce have been guided somewhat by the principles of a resolution which obtaiue the sanction of this House nearly 20 years ago, to which I will refer. On the 21st, of Deccmber. 1947, the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. wizxrwoarn] offered the following resolution: "Resolved. That the General Government has the rbiovewres ratos acroennsetrcuecstsasurycahnhdaprrboopresrofo nrdthimo protection of our Navy and of our commerce and so for the defensesof our country." The principle of that resolution covers the appropriations called forin this bill, and I find while on the vote taken on the resolution the names of Jacob Thompson and others of that class are recorded in the negative, that besides the names of several gentlemen who are here upon the floor who are recorded in the affirmative, there were 3 not here who gave to that resolution, and to the principle of the resolution, the authority of their distinguished names. I refer to John Quinc Adams, Abraham Lin colu, and Andrew Jo inson, all of whom sustained the resolution in the terms which I have read. Nearly 40 years ago ltMr. Webster emphatically gave his opinion, which he said had been expressed some 20 years before that time in favor of the general power of Congress, an of the policy of its exercise by the Government. I hold in my hand an extract from Mr. Webster, which I will read. It is as follows: "Congress has power to regulate commerce, both internal and external and whatever might have beenthought to be thaliteral interpretation of these termsWeknow the construction to have been.from the very 1st assemblingof Congress and by the very men who framed the Constitution, that the regulation of commerce comprehended such measures us were necessaryfor its support. its improvement.its advancement and justified such OXPEINHUHCSM piers. beacons and lighthouses and the cleaning out of harbors required. Instancesot this sort in the application of the Gensral revenue have been frequent from the commencement of the goVernment. the same form, precisely. exists in relation to internal as well as external trade it was not eas to seewhy like expenditures might not be justific when made on internal objects. The vast regions of the West "are enctrated by rivers to which those of Euro O me lint as rills and brooks. But the navigation O those noble streams, washing R8 they do the margin of 1/3rd of the States of the Union. was obstructed by obstaclese apiible of being removed and ct not likely to be removed but.by the power of the general government. Was this ajuslifiablo about of expenditure from the national Treasury? lilliout hesitation I have thought.itwas. A vast chain of lakes. if it be not ninropropt rto call them a sncvt ssionof inland se us stretches into the decp interior of this northern art of the continent. as if kindly plncod there by provido nooto brcak the continuity of the land, and afford the easier and readier intercourseof water conveyance. But these vast lakes r aired also harbors and lights and breakwaters. An were these lawful objectsof national legislation 7 To me, certainly, they have appeared to be such as clearly as if they were on the Atlantic border; The 1st Corigress committed the Government to the policy of the bill. The not passed on the 7th of August, 1780, the not referred to by Mr. Webster, and which was approved by George ll ashington, for the establishment of lighthouses, beacon buoys, and public piers, was a contemporaneous construction of the Constitution admitting the power of Congress to legislate for rendering the navigation of inlets, or harbors or ports of the U.S. easy and safe. There was little internal commerce at that time and our foreign commerce was very limited; and yet, in 1790, Congress enacted and passedanother law. In August, l 790, an appropriation was made for the security of navigation. In March, 1791, in April, 1792, in June, 1794, and in March, 1705, other laws were passed upon the some general subject. in March, 1706, the SecyTreasury, Mr. Oliver Wolcott, recommended an appropriation of $16,000 for 4 new piers in the Delaware river, and in April, 1798, a further sum of $00,000 was recommended for the samcpurpose. The reasons given by Mr. Wolcott in the report which he made are of great significance at this time. They will be ound in the Report on Commerce and Navigation for that year, volume one, page 390. He says: “ A question arises whether expensesof the nature proposedought to be general or whether they ought be defrayedby a duty imneedon tonn e of vesselsemployedin the river cluware. Ou this point it is respectllilly suggested that tbough it may be dif ficult to form general rules by which to determine in all cases it at establishments ought to be aun ported at the expenseof the U.S., and that hougliit is certain that manyof the bays, rivers, and harbors of this country are suse e tibleof improvements which it would be inexpe ient for the government to undertake, especiallyat present. et it is equally certain that national interests oft O 1st importance are concentered in the principal commercial cities which cannot, consistently with public interests, be submittedto the direction of loenl policy. he Secretary has considered the river Delaware, clow Philadelphia. ns eutitled in respect to catch lishments for the security of navigation to the some consideration as any part of high son. The proposed the coastadjoining the eign vessels and morewill be useful to for to American vesselsfrom all the Sjutraisted sic, ti Commercial orts upon the river within the oxtent of of 3 Stateswill, in proportion to the by the establishment, sbwehipeeharlry e duessmire udehasb the port of Philadelphia." Now, we have at this time many “Delaware rivers, " rivers and harbors in the interior which were then hardly known, but which have become iiow of as much relative national value as the river Delaware was at that time, and the arguments applicable to that river are all with the same force applicable to those cov ered by this bill, and every appropriation which we ask for here comes fairly within the principle upon which the old Delaware appropriation stood. The laws, during our early islory, concerned lighthouses, buoys, piers, ken but us the wantspf commerce increased, as the nation grew in resources, other laws were passed applying more generally the same principle. In April, 1798, a law was passed to stake out the channel of Warren river, RhdIsland, and moneys were appro riuted for similar purposes in May, 1802, and iIarch, 1805. After that time during different years other ilipproliriations were made for like purposes in States upon the sea board and away from the sea board, but all for the general objects indicated in the 1st act approved by W usbingtou. l have here a report made by General Dela. ficld at this session, in reply to a communication which I was directed by the ComCommerce to address to the Secretary of “or, and which will be found as Executive Dept No. 18, and if gentlemen will examine it they will find that from 15124down to ISM, aipropriations were made for building piers, or building break waters, for removing obstructions in rivers, for improving harbors, for imroving navigation, for dee sing chan nels, gr the preservation of bar ore, and for the construction of sea walls. I believe that these will be found to embrace substantially all the classes of a propriations which are contained in this hi i. The years when these appropriations were made will be found upon examination of this same document to cover the Administrations of Presidents Monroe and John Quincy Adams of General Jackson and Mr. Van Baron and Mr. Tyler. During the early history of our Government we had comparatively no inland commerce, no lakes valu able for commerce; we had no valley of the Mississippi; we had no West; but all that was wanted was done. The State of Illinois, if I recollect aright, was admitted into the Union in the year 1818. That State, yOiin as she is, was 6 years old before a dollar O money was appropriated by the General Government for the imrovement of harbors upon the classic waters of ake Erie. There have can during these latter years other waters which have been dyed red with patriot blood; there have been other battleficlds than those thereabout where the blood of Union men has been freely poured out to save the nation. But yet, during all the life of the nation to come, I believe we shall turn back to no waters with more ride than to those where Perry 1st achieve his brilliant victory, the waters of Lake Erie. It would have been well if the Government of the U.S. had looked to that lake some years before it did. ln1824 the 1st appropriation was made. During the war of 1812, as you know, GreatBritain proposed to hold command of Lake Erie, and With her squadron there was block ading the port of Erie. Perry was stationed upon those waters to defend the interests of the U.S. He then contrived to build and equip his small fleet within the harbor at that port; the British squadron being outside the bar in the dee waters of the lake, and his vessels within is fleet at last was ready, but the Niagara and the Lawrence could not move because there was a bar which the government had not yet seen fit to remove.“ It so happened that the British commander hoisted sail, and went off one day with his squadron, leaving Perry, who had been providing some means to get his vessels over the bar, to exc cute his purpose if he could. With the greatest labor the Lawrence and the Niagara were lightened of their armaments, and means wore used, which the skillful commander had before provided, by which the vessels were lifted over the bar an floated in the deep waters of the lake. Before the British squadron returned, the American fleet was preared for its reception; and well we know that it was not long afterward that the battle of Lake Erie was foughtand Perrys victory was won. how, Mr. Speaker, one of 2 courses must be taken. Either the Government must lift up its hand from the sea coast and from lake and from river; it must say to the people, “You have fought for and made the nation andsaved its life; but now within your own State borders you must protect and take care of your own interests;” or else the sea coast, East and West, so for us it shall be necessary for the security of navigation, and the mighty rivers and the great lakes of the continent must be cleared of their obstructions and their harbors rendered secure, so that they maybe entered with safety by the vessels of the U.S and by the vessels of commerce, and I hope the members of the 39th Congress will upon this billiGSl long be found upon the side of the on e. p Sir, if the action of the early Government and of our early Presidents appropriating moneys for roads and canals and the various improvements of rivers, then of some commercinlvalne, and of harbors on the sea coast, was pursuant to constitutional powers ranted or fairly the question must be (fizemed fiiirly settilneiplied, and at this time the demands of more millions of men whose interests are involved in one improvement than achieved our independence cannot be properly denied. In one appropriation asked for here, more than 5 million people are directly interested and yet the States where they live are mere children in the Union saurdy young ones and hard strikers they have done some splendid fighting duringthese 4 years past; they have sent their 100s of 1,000s of men to help save that flag and we should see to it that it shall securely wave over their lakes and rivers. Sir, we have 7 great lakes: Superior, Huron, Michigan, StClair, Eric, Ontario, and Champlain. Without estimating at all the rivers and the canals which connect those lakes, it will be found that there is a straight line of lake navigation of 1,573 miles in len th. But that does not state the whole truth, or the lake coast is 5,000 niilcsin extent, of which 3000 miles are within the territory of the U.S. Leaving the lakes and goin to the rivers, We find that, takin the rivers i ississippi, missouri, Arkansas, Chic, and Red river, with their tributaries, we have a length of navigable waters of 16,674 miles. The inestimable national importance of the navigation of these lakes and rivers cannot be overstated. The whole Mississippi valley, with its 14 States, the 8 States upon the lakes, depend upon these lakes and rivers as their natural high ways to aeominercial market. We can estimate the present commercial value of the products of the West; but we cannot tell how that value will be multiplied. Yet for many years from the time when the last general bill nssed by Congress found its death in the presidents portfolio, every dollar of appropriation has been earned by the earnest advocates of these improvements before it was authorized by Congress and became a law. I do not propose to occupy the time of the House now by reviewing at any length the action of Congress upon the subject of river and harbor improvement and yet it may be well to recur to that action briefly, and I propose to do so. In 1808 Albert Gnllatins famous report was made, recommending a grand appropriation of $20,000,000 for turnpike roads, canals, and inland navigation. Within the range of his recommendations were immensely long public roads and canals running north and south, and cast and west. There were large appropriations recommended for imroving the navigation of the great rivers.That recommendation of Mr. Gallatin was not acted n )011. It will be remembered that shortly afler that time there were heard in the air the distant mutterings of thunder. Soon afterward a cloud not bigger than a mans hand was seen. The eyes of all and the attention of all were directed to what was to come. The war with England, which followed, put a stop to appropriation of that description. But from u out 1808 until the presidential term of Mr. Tyler, through contest and through tribulation, and notwithstanding now and then a Presidential veto, appropriations to the following amounts, according to a very valuable report made by Colonel A crt tot be War Dept were made: during the presidential term Mr. Jefferson, $48, 500; duriii the term of Mr. Madison, $250800; durin" tie term of Mr. Monroe, $707, 621; during the term of Mr. John Quincy Adams $2, 310, 475; during the term of General Jae son, $10, 582, 882; during the term of Mr. Van Buren, $2, 222, 544; during the term of Mr. Tyler, $1, 076, 500. ProsidentT ler, in his annual messa cto the 28 h Congress, made at its rst session, stronvly recommended to the attention of Congress the western lakes and rivers. During that same session, however, he declined to sign, but returned with his veto, a bill providing appropriations for eastern harbors, nown on the records of that dayas the “eastern harbor bill;" While he signed a bill for imrovements of western lakes and rivers. Att e last 1 session of the same Congress, a joint bill cov ering the East and the West was passed by Congress. The yeas upon the passage of that bill were, as the recor shows, 105; the nays were 96. The Senate passed it by 27 yeas to 11 nays. Among the names of those who supported the bill, I find upon the Journal that of our distinguished friendfrom Ohio, [Mr. Seunxcs] now at the head of the Military Committee, and also that of the ntleman I from Chicago, [Mr. Wssrwonru. Within ten days afterward Mr. Tylers term exired: i and so did the Congress during which he hill 1 was passed; and the bill remained unsigned in l theI ortlolio of the President. have referred, Mr. Speaker, to the report of Colonel Abert. His re art, as chief of Engi neers, was communicate to Congress by Mr. Polk in his 1st message; and the attention of Congress was invited to the suggestions which it contained. Colonel Abert called especial attention to the lake navigation, and described with a good deal of force the wants, the commerce, and the national value of the harbors of the lakes. Colonel Abel t says: “ We seethe immensewealthand prosperitywhich these harbors have developedand t isimmense national interests which require protection interests of commerce and interestsof national defense,protection to vast amounts of property, to numbersof livos and to a powerful auxiliary in time of war. Now. what is the rotcctionwhich theso vast national interests requlrcf) Harbors. only harbors. meansof entering places of security to load and unload and for shelter in time of storms. Our Atlantic coast, more favorably situated in some respects.calls for protection in the form of costly fortifications and of numerous troops. Our lake coast. as extensive as that of the Atlantic.is deficientin harborsand places of refugc. It calls comparatively but TOTEDHl Lpro tection iu the way of fortifications. but it calls for protection from stormsand for facilities to outer the arbors." Well, sir, Congress did attend to the recommendations of the President, and to the suggestions made in that report and during that congress a bill was passed to protect the national interests referred to. There are now some 3 or 4 gentlemen upon the floor who supported that ill. Among them I find the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK] and his colleague, [Mr. DELANO] the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. Groomsim] the Gentfrom Chicago, Mr. Wssrwoarri] and the Gentfrom Kentucky, [Mr. Guiana] JeffersonDavis voted in the negative. There were 49 appropriations contained in that bill. All of them except 14 were for improvements of the same character as those which had been approved by General Jackson during his presidential term. Mr. Polk vetoed the bill in July or August, 1846, and another smaller bill, which was passed toward the close of the next session, found its death in the drawer of the President. At the next session, December, 1847, bringing it down to the 1st session of the Ihirtieth Congress, an elaborate message was sent to Congress, in which former arguments against the protection of national interests of commerce were repeated at great length. In 1848 the House passed another bill covering the same general ground. It was reported to the Senate on the last day of the session, after having passed the House, and failed there for want of time. There was a valuable bill passed in 1852, and in the report which I have referred to from General elafield will be found the appropriations contained in that bill. Since then there have been several 5 ecial bills, notwithstanding the vetoes of the resi den: which have become laws. I hold in my him 3 bills passed during the 1st session of the 34thCongress, one to deepen the channels over the flats in StMarys river, Michigan, another to remove obstructions to navigation in the mouth of the Mississippi river at South Pass and Pass a lOutre, and the other for defiening the channel over the StClair flats, Michigan. These failed to receive the sanction of President Pierce, but were passed by the Senate over the veto in July, 1856, and 2 days afterward, I believe, were passed by the House. There was another bill, 1st session 34th Congress, for the improvement of the Des Moines rapids. Mississippi river. That was not fortunate enough to.reccive the Presidents signature, was returned to the House on the 11th of August, 1856, and passed the House the same day and the Senate on the 16th of August. At the end of the 1st session of the 30 3rd Congress a bill was passed and returned to the HoRep without his signature. At the e inning of the 2nd stasion of the same Congress reasons were communicated at length and the same argu, ment presented so often made before and so often answered by the ablest expounders of the Constitution. In 1866, we proposed to ascertain, on the principle of the resolution I referred to at the commencement of my remarks, whether, after 4 ears of war, when loyal men of the East and ilrest have given their fortunes and their lives to the support, rese ue and preservation of the Government, something may not be done that will enrich the people and the government at the same time; Is this work national or sectional? I cannot, of course, examine into the details of the items contained in this bill, but there is no item that cannot be defended upon its own independent ground. There is no one which does not rest upon estimates carefully made at the War Dept. If it shall be necessary, I hold myself (prepared, in behalf of the committee, to justify each specific appropriation. want now to speak of 2 items, one concerning the Mississippi river, and the other concerning the StC air flats. There are 4 appropriations for the improvement of the Mississippi river, one at its month, one at the Des Moines rapids, one at RockIsland ra ids, and one for the procurement and use oihsnagboats to remove obstructions in western rivers. I say that it is a national disgrace that the Mississippi river has been left so long compar atively valueless; not absolutely, for it would not be possible that the “ Father of Waters” could be made absolutcl valueless, notwithstanding the fact that there are at the Des Moines rapids, the RockIsland rapids and possibly higher up and before you reach StAnd, obstructions which, during a great portion of the year, greatly, and at times wholly, imede the navigation of the river. It is not only the largest of North American rivers, but, if we consider it in reference to its tributaries and to its wonderful commercial facilities, it is the greatest river in the world. The remotest source of the Mississippi river is no less than 3,160 miles above the Gulf, at Lake Itase a For how many centuries that river has cured its waters into the Gulf no man knows, but history tells us that in 1520, a century before the Pi] ims landed at Plymouth, the Spanish mariner Pinedo sailed around the Gulf and saw what he called a “little sea, ” and a mighty river entering in, which he called the “river of the Holy Ghost.” and from that time visited as is supposed by early Spanish and French mariners in the 16th and 17th centuries among whom were Narvaez, De Soto, Marquette, and LaSulle, its stream has rolled for 2000 miles, passing at several points over ledges of rock where navigation is made impossible at times, and is always unsafe and dangerous. At these rapids the rocks must be removed if no better way can be found to make safe the navigation and protect the commerce of the Mississip i. It was Father Marquette, a Jesuit priest, who gave or rather who fixed the name which the Indians had before that time given to that mighty river. The men who thought they had ise overed the river attom ted to fasten upon it other names, but the old Ojib beway name of Mississippi was put into the books by Father Marquette, and the river has borne that name and must bear it forever. This bill introduces the name of that same Jesuit priestin another connection. I suppose that it is the same man after whom the iarbor is named for which an appropriation will be found in this bill, the harbor o Marquette on Lake sufferior. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the attention of the House to some practical and pretty important facts gomg to show the national importance of these proposed appropriations. 25 years ago all the NewEngland States, with Pennsylvania and NewYork, had a population of about 6 million 500,000. A census taken this day, after 4 years of war, will show in.the 7 States of Illinois. Indiana, Ohio, Missouri, Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota, 0. population of not less tiau ten millions. At the Detroit convention which was held in July, 1865. Mr. James F. Joy, of Detroit, referring to the agricultural growth of those seveu States, said: " Contrast nowthe progressof agriculture between the 2 sections. all the Atlantic. States namedin 185oproduced 20.000010bushels wheat and in 1860 had increased the productiononly 2.000.00a0nd rison to 22,000,000.In the same years the lake States (above niimerlihad produced 40.000.00i)n 1850and 881111.0i0no1860ofw cat. Of corn. the former Stains produced. in 1850.47.0)0300 and in 186051000.0(!) ushcls. The lake Statesproduced in 153"o.f VUlll, 185.000.00boushels, and in 860319.000, 00ainl, d at the samerato ofiucrcailo will inten yearsmore produce about 2(Xl.000.000 bushels of wheat and 600000.0 (1) bushelsofcoru." f “Now, thvrs are ten million people interestedin thrsrproducts, and to them the matter of accessto market is of the 1st and last importance."v f o “ is not the possibility of getting to market through avenuesnow open but the expenseof so doing which is involved. Every additional avenueaids the facil ities and diminishes the oxpense.“ "With themillions of the Vest the avenuetomarket is a vital question. hcu olosoupon the Mississi p i corn is burned for fucl. becausethoexpense of Not in it to market is more than it is worth: when from Il lnOlN, on an average. it. costs the farmer tln co bushelsto got the 4th to market in NewYork, and much more than that to lay it down in Liver pool: when fiom all the lake States it costs half of all the flour and wheatto the farmer to get the rest into the markets of the world. it. has become high time for the Governmentto look a little to the protection of his interests.” But, Mr. Speaker, although these 7 States that I have named are all more or less interested in these Mississippi river improvements. there are 5 States whose interests are directly and vitall concerned. I refer to Missouri, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. In presenting to the House the national importance of these appropriations, I certainly cannot do better than to refer to some facts which were laid before the convention held in February, 1866, at Dubuque, Iowa., My friendfrom Iowa [Mr. ALLIsoii has furnished me with a copy of the proceeings of that convention; an I will read some extracts from a speech made by Mr. Robb, of the Dubuque Produce Exchange: “The importanceof this nostion, and titanium tndeof the interestsinvoly in itssolntion, Willmoro clearly appearon an examination of the productive ness of the 5 States named. In 1860the whole number of acresof improved land in all the States and Territories was. 163, 281, 389 this Missouricontained. 6, 216, 871 Illinois. 13.234.473 Iowa. TBO.253 “ise ons 3.746.036 Minuesot., ". I ammo Or a fraction IQSSthan one6th. "The total value of crops for lRtll is estimatedby the Agricultural Bureau of the Dept of the Interior to hava been. 5l.tspl.5!3.090 Of this sum Illinois produced. "$214, 488.4gfl Wisconsin. 51.!3Lifia2 Missouri. filillfijilll Iowa. 7l.lfltl, 481 Minnesota 13, 1 68.1z5403, 692.474 Or more than one 4th of the value of the entire crops of the country. But theseestimatesof valuo are the estimatedva uoaftho various productsin the States where produced. In this way the value of articles in the aboveStates an cars to a great disadvantago, becausebeing so far from market. they are ratedmuchlessthan thosamoarticles in otherStatos. ospsoiallythosenoortho son hoard. The sameis true of the estimatedvalue of the live stock. which, on to undersell theEmrlisli farmer in his own market, ll corn from Illinois to NewYork was 65 the 1st of January, 1865, was. SQW.879, 1Wand eventually compel him to seek other pursuits. Ofthis Vheatcould bes hipped from this mint to NewYork Illinois had. $116.588.288 for 33 cents perbushel )y the way of New Missouri. +1. 66 Orlcaiis, while the average cost by present transportation or Iowa. 66.2.490 from the Mississippi river to New or is Wisconsin. 36.911.165 65 cents perbushc. Here is a savingof 30 Minnesota. 8,860,0152 cents perbushel. This on 30 million of our 3.363.730 Or morethanone4th. A inster standard by which to measurethe productivenessof those states would be a.comparison of the amount of their respective sroducts, 51110th0e value is so largely affecte by the i“stancefrom market. the Great staplesof agriculture are wheat. corn, beef, an rk. Comparin these, we find that the total number of bushels o wheat produced in all the Statesand Territories in 1864(except the cotton States, whose production was almost nominal, probably not.more than one6th of what it was in 1860) was. 160.095, sza Illinois produced" Mipaourp. WISDOHHD" 66, 105, 786 Or a.fraction lessthan one half. The total number of bushels of corn produced. “530,451,403 Illinois produced it.35 Missouri. wiseousin. IMoi nwnae.s. o. t.a 244, 986.768 Or nearly one half. The whol enumber of cattle and oxen. January 1 use, was. 7, 072, 59l Illinois had. Missouri. Wisconsin. Io wu. Minnesota. Or morethan one thi rd. 25. !)79 The total number of hogswas. 13, 070.887 Illinois had 4.896.503 1860 r moro than1/3rd. he entire population of the U.S. lin w iseotiei. 4, 516, 880 Or about one 7th. “Thus it will beseenthat these 5 Statespossessing only one7th of all the population and one6th of all the improved land. neverthelessin 1361produced more than one 4th in value of the entire crop: morethan one 4th in value of all the live stock; morethan one3rd in nuiuberof all the cattle and hogs, and neurlypne half of all the wheat and corn grown in the U.S. Here we find 4 and one hull millions of agriculturists alon the up perMississippi, producing in a single year from 1/3rd to one hnlfof all the production of the leading stapIlesofi an eIstimatedvalue of 86770363114." A glance at the commerceof the Mississippi will showhow necessaryit is that this work should be done immediately and effoctually. 30 yearsago stua mhoiitse iigatied in the river trade aggregated but a.low score. Now there are over 1,000. of the value of 87:20.0“),000A.s the export trade of thi se placeswas about equal to their imports, we have for the entire commerceof these points nearly $560, 011,000.But this does not include the comnicrce of NewOrleans, Mi in ibis, Dubuque, and otheriiiiportant towns. Inclut c the tradeof these oints and the aggregatevalue of the trade of the Iis ppi and its tributaries, theOhio and Missouri, In 1365wastmorethan e, quivalent to 3 times the whole foreign commerceof the U.S. Remove theseobstructionsand the producers of those states IlIl then have it convenient and ade quate outlet to themarketson our ownsea board and of Europe. They can market their grain in London and Liverpool.be successful competitorsof European producers on their own soil, and eventually control the price of brcad stuffs in the very center of the Worlds trade. In Europe land is scarce, and rents ruine usly high. The consequenceis that our farm 01?, who have cheaplundsand mechanical labor, can producegrain with profit at figures that would ruin the European farmer. The only obstacle that prevents the western producer from underselling and by SHCQCSrIU competition driving foreign producers from their own markets, is the want of cheap transportation. For the past 5 years the average rine peibushel of wheat in London and Liverpoo has been 8137in gold, or $19001 our own currency. The English farnicri annot produceit at a lesse ostwith any profit. The land is mostly held by the nobility, who exact as a rental therefor 40%. of the productions. Improve these rapids, and grain canbe lenLfrom Duhuque to NewOrleans for 20 cents and thenceto Liverpool for 17 conts, including cost of transhipment, thus net tingour farmers at least{I 50 per bushel aadsiving them the power surplus crop of 50 million bushelsannually raised. would make the enormoussum of $9, 600,000.“ Now, the total value of the crops for 1864 throughout the country is shown to have been $1,564, 543, 690. 0ft at immense amount the 5 States of Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, Iowa, and Minnesota. reduced in value more than one 4th part. at that statement does not show the whole truth, because these values are values which are estimated in the States where these cereals are produced. But in Boston, Massachusetts, corn last year was $1 21 perbushel; in Illinois, it was 29 cents perbushel. It will be seen at once, therefore, that if those 5 States produced more than one 4th of the value of the whole crop of 1864, estimated at. home prices, what aninercased proportion would be shown if values were more equalized than they are now. I understand that at this moment there are in the State of Iowa 12 million acres of unimproved lands where the plow has never entered. It is not possible, perhaps, to demonstrate more truly or clearly the national importance of theseimprovements; but still I desiietopresent further a few later statistics, which I have prepared from documents subsequently published. I want to call the attention of the House to one single crop, and that is the corn crop of 1865. In Maine, the corn rodnct in that year was 1, 692, 020 bushels; in Yew Hampshire, 1, 468, 090 bushels; in Vermont, 1, 796, 356; in Massachusets, 2, 363, 245; in RhdIsland, 407, 418; and in Connecticut, 2, 265, 818; making an ag gregate of 10, 082, 947 bushels as the corn crop of these 6 States for 1865. Now, if you add to that the corn crop of NewYork, Pennsylvania, and NewJersey, yen will have an aggre gate of 170, 638, 279 bushels as the corn crop in that year of these 9 States. The State of Illinois produced in the same year 177, 095, 852 bushels; that is to say, 7,000,000 bushels more than these 9 States. Ohio yielded 04, 119, 644 bushels; Michigan, 17, 520, 305; Indiana, 116, 069, 316; Missouri, 52, 021, 715; Wisconsin, 13, 449, 405; Iowa, 62, 997, 813; and Minnesota, 5, 577, 795; making an aggregate of 538, 851, 845 bushels. Now look at the values of corn in 1865: Stores. Perbushel. Ibtal value. Maine. $121 NewHampshire. crmont. Massachusetts RhdIsland. Coniieeticut. $11, 887, 334 44 $41, 316.012 60} 10, 705, 850 402 5 44, 918, 823 Illinois“ 29} 51.940536 Missouri62 27, 031, 292 Wisconsin 46 6.200.726 Iow a.? The whole value of the Illinois corn crop was $51, 800, 536. the whole value of the crop of the 6 NewEngland States was $11, 887, 334, and yet those 6 States produced only one 17th as much as the crop of Illinois, while the value was between one 4th and one 5th. Now, sir, to get a bushel of corn from Illinois to Boston would cost 8ode and a narter cents; that is to say, it would cost the ifference between its value in the Boston market and its cost at home; to carry the corn crop of 186 5from Illinois to Massachusetts would cost $143, 890, 379 75. The price in NewYork was 95 cents perbushel. The cost of getting a bushel of Mand 3 quarter cents, and the cost of transporting the corn crop of Illinois to NewYork city would be $116, 410, 522. 69. The whole crop of Illinois in 1565, taking the corn, wheat, rye, oats, barley, buckwheat potatoes, tobacco, and hay was of the value of $116, 274, 821; that is to say, the whole era was worth $166, 201 69.less than the cost O transporting to NewYork the corn crop alone Of 1865. Now, With an unobstructed navigation of the Missnssip i, that corn crop could he landed in NewYorkcity, at a savuig of $63, 311, 769 09. In this estimate I have allowed 35 and 3/4ths cents as the cost.ofgelting a bushel of corn down the Mississippi. But I received a letter this morning on that subject, some portions of which I ask to have ryad.