Mr. FARNSWORTH., My colleague [Mr. WASHBURNE] opposes this bill. I want it under stood by the House that he does not speak for the whole State of Illinois. The Legislature of Illinois authorized the building of this bridge, and in my opinion a very large oof the jeople of the State are in favor of continuing it as it is. The fact seems to be that this bridge was erected 6 or 7 years ago, and during all the time which has since intervened but one single case has been presented to the committee of pretended material obstruction to navigation or damage to a boat. There is a draw to this bridge of 120 feet, which, it is claimed, is wide enough for all practical purposes. Every bridge is oan obstruction to navigation. If you drive a pile or construct a pier, it is, in one sense, technically an obstruction to navigation; boats and rafts have not got the whole surface of the river to float upon; and therefore to say that a bridge shall be constructed so as to be no obstruction to navigation is to say that no bridge shall be constructed at all, and to say that the general commerce of the country passing from west to east shall be obstructed at this huge ditch run ning north and south through the U.S., which shall remain forever as a perpetual bar rier to commerce. Now, sir, there are 800 miles of railroad in operation from Chicago westward, and the roads are being extended at the rate of 100 miles every few months. Shall we say that those roads shall be obstructed at the Mississippi river, and bridges which have been erected, and which are no material obstruction to mavigation, shall be torn down and others erected and the people taxed by an additional tariff on freight for their erection, for that would be the consequence? I say no. Why, sir, there are now in the U.S. 27,000 miles of railroad in operation, and I would like to show to the house the amount of comparative revenue derived from railroads and steamboats in the U.S. In 1865 the railroads paid $5, 917,000, while the steamboats of the U.S. paid only $638,000. In 1866 the railroads paid $7, 600,000, while the steamboats paid only half as much as they paid before, only $308,000. My colleague [Mr. WASHBURNE] says that he is representing very large interests, that when he speaks against this bill he is speaking in behalf of an interest of millions of dollars in his district. What does he mean by that? The steamboat interest? Well, how much revenue do you think the steamboat interest in my colleague's district paid in 1865 and 1866? In 1865 they paid the enormous sum of $347, and in 1866 they paid the mag nificent sum of $65 90.