Mr. SHERMAN. I know that for acon siderable period of time there is no limit on the tolls, and then a revision is to be made by 5 commissioners, one to be appointed by the President, one by the Governor of NewYork, one by the Governor of Massachusetts, one by the Governor of Illinois, and one by the canal company. I look upon a tribunal of that kind to revise tolls as of very little account. At any rate it is not the proper way to place it under the control of 5 men, one interested, bein appointed by the company, another appointe by the POTUS and 3 appointed by the Governors of NewYork, Massachusetts, and Illinois. Why confine the appointments to those particular States? The State of Ohio will have much more interest in this canal when built than any other State. In NewYork it will be a rival to works held by the State itself. The State of Massachusetts has nointerest in it. whatever that I know of. The produce going through this canal will either go on to the sea through the StLaw rence, or will go through the Oswego canal on its way to NewYork, so that I cannot see why Massachusetts is designated as one of the States which is to have the appointment of acommissioner. At any rate this mode of regulating tolls is a very insufficient one, and I think that when this work is done it ought to be done by the Government of the U.S. In the mean time we have the benefit of the Welland canal and we have the benefit of the Erie ca nal. We have those 2 modes of transit now. It. will be a long time before this work is completed under the management of a coin pany, and we are to undertake to guaranty their bonds to the amount of $6,000,000. The water privileges conferred by this improvement will be immensely valuable. They ought to be controlled by the Government. when constructed. This is the great navigable stream, the great oundary between the Canadas and the U.S. It will be a work of great cost and of great importance, and it ought to be under the control of the Government. It seems to me that under these circumstances we ought not to embark in an operation that will involve us in the ultimate payment of $6,000,000 and the interest that may accumulate upon that sum, because no senator here, I imagine, supposes that this canal company will ever payback the money. That has not been the usual custom in dealing with Government in such matters. With a single exception no money ever spent by the U.S. in a.work of internal improvement has been refunded. It is very common to put in the bills a provision for refunding the money, but. it has never been actuall done except in the case of the Louisville an Portland canal. That is the only exception, and there the mere principal was refunded after a long while, and then tetolls were applied to buy out all the private interests. It was found necessary and indispensable in that case to buy out all the private interests and vest the whole property substantially in the U.S. That work, which was built by the Louisville and Portland Canal Company, the U.S. owning 1/2 of the stock and individuals owning the other half, was conducted with great success, and finally the Government of the U.S. received back the principal of its money, and then it became necessary to reduce the tolls. The interests of private individuals, however, would not yield to a proper seduction of the tolls, and the result was that by the consent of Kentucky and the U.S. a law was passed which authorized the U.S., substantially, to buy out the interests of the private stockholders. That has been done, and now the whole property is owned by the U.S., and no tolls are received except enough to keep the canal in repair and to enlarge it. That is always the result of the dealing of the Government with a public improvement, and it ought to be the result. It seems to me that if we place this franchise and the construction of t iis work within the power of any corporation, we shall either be compelled to buy out that corporation, as we did in the case of the Louisville and Port land eanal, or we shall have constant complaints abOut the tolls, constant struggles for their decrease; and if the danger with which the Senfrom NewYork threatens us should occur, then we certainly should be in a very bad predicament. A single corporation would control both charters, because if the NewYork Central railroad should ever buy out the Erie canal they would undoubtedly buy out this competing line, and the result would be that one huge monopoly would control this whole business. Under the circumstances I feel disposed to postpone the bill, especially as one section of it which is still retained, and without which this bill could not have passed the House, provides that no action can be taken under it until after the meeting of the Legislature of NewYork and its assent shall have been given. I have it from members of the Housewho are in favor of the bill that it could not have passed the House and could not have had the sanction of the committee that reported it Without that section.