Mr. ALL ‘Y. The Gentfrom Missouri asks me whether they can et their produce transported as cheaply by rai road as by water. They cannot to some points, but they can to NewYork and to the great markets of the East as cheaply as by the river. That is all I meant to sa. Mr. Speaker, the point is this, and only this, that these parties who appeared before the committee in opposition to bridging the mississippi river were parties in interest. All the peeple who presented themselves there had direct interest against the erection of these bridges. I do notmention this in disparagement of these gentlemen or their judgment in reference to this matter, but only to show the simple fact that they were interested; that the House may attach only the importance to the testimony that such facts warrant. Now, this opposition is no new thing. It has always been so all the world over. Macau day tells us that in 1669, when they proposed to It can be taken by water at created the greatest commotion and excitement; petitions were immediately sent to the King and Privy Council in opposition to it; all the inn keepers, all the stock breeders, all the navigators upon the Thames indeed, all of the innumerable class of people whose interests were affected loudly protested against it. Yes, sir, in England it created the greatest excitement when the simple reposition was made that flyin coaches shouldprun between Oxford and Lou on between sunrise and sunset. It was thought to be intolerable, and denounced as the destruction of vested rights and an in vasion that would work serious evils to many important interests. But flying coaches were established notwithstanding. I remember very well when railroadswere established in my own State. I remember, when a boy, that when the railroad system as introduced there was the greatest excitement; and all the stage drivers, tavern keepers, all those who owned turnpike stock,0t up petitions and remon strances and made the grentestodo, declarin, in order to preserve their business, railroad s must be stopped. I consider this op position on a par with that I havementioned. pWhat these men say ought to weigh but little under the circumstances. I do not think it should have the slightest force in determining the judgment of the House against this bill. I do not think the testimony and feelings of these captains and pilots should have any more weight or ferce than those of any other class of men engaged in any other vocation of life. the testimony on the other side was overwhelming that this bridge does not materially obstruct the navigation of the river. Now, in regard to the suits at law, to which reference has been made by the Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. wAsunUiuvn.] It was stated, if not in the committee outside of the committee, that there were important suits pending against thisbridge, and that this would 0 doing great injusticeto the parties who had entered those suits. We made diligent inquir ies of all parties who were on the stand, and who ought to have known if anybody knew, whether such suits were pending, and they testified that there were no such suits. As I said before, this bridge is built in the most satisfactory manner, and the obstruction, if any, is vcry slight. Let me say, of all the boats which have passed there ten48 in a single year, only these 2 accidents have happene. Ilenve it, therefore, to the House to determine whether, under these circumstances, with the great facility the bridge affords for transportation of all this produce, this amendment shall be adopted. Let me show what this was by the sworn testimony of parties who appeared before the committee. The freight over the bridge last year was 126,000 tons and 55,000 passengers and 20 trains daily. They open the draw ordinarily in less than 3 minutes, but are often not more than 2 minutes. They can open it, as they frequently have done, in one minute. It appeared from the sworn testimony of the parties who were before the committee and who presented statistics that this was so. And not only that, Mr. Speaker, but it is shown that, while 20 trains run over this bridge daily, only 4 or 5 steamboats, on an average, pass under it during the season of navigation. In addition to that, I will say and it is an important fact in this case that I must noticethat several tens of mail matter 0 ever this bridge daily; and further, that for Igourmonths of the year the navigation of the river is ob. structed by ice. It is also navigable for small boats only during several weeks in the navi able season. When the river was closed by ice before the bridge was built all the freight had to lie over, and ngreat deal of it for months. This alone furnishes an argument ofirresistible force in favor of bridging this great river; and I submit whether, under these circumstances, the House can refuse to sanction this recomrun flying coaches from Oxford to London, itI mendation of the committee and declare this bridge a pest route, when it is shown that the bridge was built in the best pessible manner, that but one accident has occurred for 18 months and that it was built by the authority of the Legislatures both of Illinois and Iowa. All this was shown and it was shown further that the bridge offers no interference or obstruction worth talking of with the navigation of the river. I will yield now to the Gentfrom NewYork.