Mr. WILLEY. It is true that I introduced this bill originally and had it referred to the ComDistCol. I did so upon no particular personal, examination of my own, but from rePresentations made to me by certain parties, who desired the action of Congress asked for in this bill. They made to me certain rePresentations which satisfied me that if their rePresentations were true it was a case proper for the interference of Congress, and for the passage of a bill of the character. which they asked. It was rePresented to me that a long time ago a certain square or lot, at that time far outside of the city, was conveyed to the Methodist Episcopal Church for. he general purposes of that church; and that since that time they gave authority for certain persons to bury their dead within the limits of that square. Many years ago certain persons did bury their dead there and the square was improved for a while; but in consequence of the approach of population and the city toward this square, indeed surrounding it and beyond it, as the lot itself being a small one, it became in their opinion a place improper for burial purposes, and many of the parties who had buried their dead there, seeing that the improvements on the lot were going into dilapidation, moved by respect for the dead of their own free will took up the remains and transferred them to cemetries outside of the city. Both on account of its being encroached upon by the population and from the abandonment of it for burial purposes by many of those who had the remains of their dead there, it seemed to me highly improper that it should be any longer retained for that purpose. I made inquiry as to the character of the conveyance that had been made to the trustees of this church originally. I was assured that there was no special trust contained in the deed limiting the use of that lot to any definite or particular purpose; but I advised the parties to place in the possession of the chairman of the committee the original deed, or a copy of it, so that he might be advised upon that subject. Upon inquiry of him just now I learned that the deed was placed in his possession and that it did not contain any limitations of the character that I have referred to, making it obligatory to appropriate the lot to any specific purpose; but the deed has been withdrawn by the parties and is not now here. I understand from the chairman, however, that such is the character of the deed.