Mr. BROOMALL. I cannot do it, I have but a little time myself. I will not vote the money which on ht to go to this righteous purpose into the pockets o a private corporation. I warn gentleman, if they vote for this bill and violate their promise to the soldiers, they cannot fall back upon the assertion of the SecyTreasury that the thing was impossible, for their votes upon this measure will stare them in the face T my. will be told they have given by one single act to a private corporation nearly 1/2 as much as would be required to equalize the bounties of the soldiers. I recollect very well when the original bill, to which this is an amendment, was brought into the House. It was not without reason that members were startled at the injustice of the proposition it contained of conveying in fee simpleto a private cororation, the stock of which might be held in ndia, England, or anywhere else, lands exceeding in amount the entire State OfIndiana, and more than double the land contained in the States of NewJersey, Maryland, and Delaware. such a proposition might well startle members of Congress and made them hesitate; but my powerful colleague, chairman of the ComAppropriat, [ML STEVENS] with his usual persuasiveness almost forced us to depart from our accustomed propriety to sustain the bill. I regret that upon that occasion I did not make my voice hear in condemnation of the measure. I allowed myselfgood naturedly and ainiably to ield my judgment to that of others; but when I saw this bill here, I was reminded that I had been somewhat recreant to my duty. I voted against the bill, I grant, but then I contented myself with that vote. such at least is my recollection at this time. What were we then told? The opponents of the bill, 1 think the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. wABHBURNE] especially, pointed out the immense amount of lands proposed to be given to this people, and contraste it with the land grants to other corporations. He earnestly remonstrated against the pass e of the bill, and foretold that the demands of the company would not end there. He foretold truly. The eloquence of my colleague and others had such effect that the bill was suffered to pass, notwithstanding the warning of the Gentfrom Illinois. It was passed upon the positive promise of these people that that would be the last. demand by that company upon the Congress of the U.S. Yet, sir, notas ade has been put into the ground, not a pole has been set, not a line has been run since the passage of that bill, and still the company is back here asking for money, money atatime when money is by no means plenty with the Government of the U.S. But. it is said by gentlemen on the other side of the question that this money will be reaid. When? I would like to know when. f we commence this system of legislation we will find the bonds of the U.S. sellin at 50 cents on the dollar long before we 9 all see a single cent of this money returned. The bill provides the means by which it is to be 0t out of the Treasury of the U.S.. but I see small chance of its being brought back. The framers of the original bill I men. the bill for which the pending substitute is moved never intended that this money should be paid. They framed the bill so that it was never necessary for the company to repay the money. I ask the gentleman They framed the very bill so that no part of the money that they proposed to take out of the Treasury should fall due to the Government until after the road was entirely completed. It is easy enough to leave ten miles of a road of 1800 miles in length unfinished, so as to avoid the payment of the money. The alterations that have been made by my colleague have not helped the bill much, very little indeed. They have only the better cov ered up, not the bad intentions of the House, not by any manner of means, but the bad intentions of somebody, I do not know who, for I inquired all day yesterday in this Hduse of everybod I saw, “ Who drafted this bill?” and was unable to find out who did it. Now, the proposition of my colleague is, that we should take security for the money we lay out. Whatis the security? Why, the right to sell at double the price of our public land, and no less, the land lying on the south side of that road. Is thatany security? and the bill proposes to vest all these lands in this company beforehand, so that they may sell them, and then the lands would be beyond our reach, in the hands of innocent 3rd parties. For they take good care in this bill to make the grant of the land entirely free from all the conditions set out in the original act.