Mr. HOWE. I state the fact that at that point, which is about 30 miles below Wi nona, there are 3 artificial highways already constructed and touching the river on both banks; and it would seem to me that ifa bridge were to be built anywherein that region, across the river, there is the properplace. It is said that the company which has constructed the road touching the Mississippi at Wine na is not authorized to go down to the river to the point opposite Larosse and does not want to go down on that side. That is very likely to be the case with that company; but we understand that there is no difficulty in the way of their coming down there if they wish. But here is the fact: this company has sought permission of the State of Wisconsin to build this bridge at Wine na, and the State has refused to give her assent. Whether she has acted wisely or not it is not for me to say. It certainly is not for me to say that she has acted unwisely. I am bound to suppose that her own Legislature knows her own interests and is truly subserving those interests. But the friends of this project insist upon it that it is of great service to the State of Wisconsin to have that traffic which they say is coming to the Mississippi from the West carried through the State of Wisconsin. If it is, Wisconsin knows it, and if it is, wise onsin will consent to have the river bridged. But I must conceive that the State of Wisconsin knows better where she wants the bridge than I can know, and I think it is not unreasonable to suppose that she knows better than this Senate. If she wants that commerce enough to allow the bridge to be built at Wine na, then the company owning the road on the other side have only to say, “ We will not cross the river any where else, ” and Wisconsin will have the privilege of taking the traffic over the river at that point or not taking it at all., I do not see anything nntitiror unreasonable in this. Hitherto the State of Wisconsin has refused her assent to the building of a bridge at Wine na, and now this very grave and serious question is presented to the Senate: will you compel the State of Wisconsin to consent to the building of a bridge at that point against her protest? I have heard it argued very gravely here, and insisted upon reeatedly, that Congress cannot impose any such obligation upon a State or any such burden upon a State; that it is absolutely beyond the constitutional power of Congress to authorize the building of a highway within the State, whether a bridge or a railroad, against the assent of the State. Here the State refuses, has refused, her consent. I really hope the Senate will not compel the State to give her consent. She has just as.mueh interest in having this traffic pass through her borders, perhaps, as Minnesota has in sendin it through. fdo not doubt but that the 2 Legislatures can agree as to the point where the bridge shall be built; but I do think it is just as fair that Wisconsin sh0uld be consulted about it as that Minnesota should be allowed to dictate the point, and I hope the Senate will give her that privilege.