Mr. ROGERS. This question was before the House at its last session in this same shape. It was debated here, and it was a very serious question indeed, not only in regard to the constitutional power of Congress to interfere with the legislation of the States, or the railroads of the States, but the policy of Congress in so doing. So much influence had that consideration that upon a division of this House there was only an; majority given in favor of that bill. After having had it discussed here for a long time, after those great questions had been argued, when the vote came to be taken the majority given in this House in favor of the bill was only 6, and it was passed in ample time to go to the Senate and receive the approval of the Senate if it met their approval. But it was postponed from time to time in the Senate, simply on the ground that the Senate were oppose to passing the bill and it was put off in that way, until the constitutional period of the session of the Senate had expired; and in that manner it was defeated. Since that bill was before the House last winter. several persons who were not members of the House then have become members of this House. There are many here who do not understand the character and nature of this bill as it has been introduced into this House. It is well known to members here that the main object of this bill is to strike at the State of Maryland and the State of NewJersey; to deprive a chartered company of my State of a cat privilege granted to it by the Legislature, yet a solemn compact made years ago. The main object of the bill is to strike at that State for the purpose of annoying this railroad, which runs from Camden to NewYork by way of the coast, and to violate a charter which was given to them by the State of NewJersey, compelling and binding them only to carry freight and passengers in the State. This is a matter, it strikes me, about which there may be a very great difference of opinion. It is a question of grave importance. The proposition embraced in this bill strikes at the very foundation of the rights of the States. No constitutional question which has been or can be raised in this House demands more consideration than the question which is now presented. I hope that the majority in this House will not press this bill at this early period of the session without giving members a chance to deliberate upon it, that we may, in our action on a question of this grave character, be satisfied that we have acted within the intent and spirit of the constitution, and according to the best policy and interest of the country. All I ask is that we may have an opportunity to debate this question, that it may be understood by the current members, that we may arrive at a conclusion that will be reasonable. I stand here, not as the advocate of any particular railroad company, but as the advocate of the rights of mv own State, which has recently come into the union by proclaiming herself now to be loyal, [Laughter] and I ask that no infringements upon her constitutional rights shall be countenanced by the Congress of the U.S. There is no reason now existing why NewJerseyloyal NewJersey, as demonstrated in the late electionshould have her rights trampled upon.