CONCERNING BRIDGES.
Mr. Gillum's bill [H. R. 266] to amend the first section of an act providing for the erection and repair of bridges over streams forming the boundary between two Counties, was read the third time.
Mr. BUSKIRK--I do not think this bill a good one. I do not think one County has a right to build a bridge to another County without the consent of that County. The bill is in the right direction, but it goes a little too far, for the bill provides that it would not be necessary to construct this bridge for the other County to take any part in it or even give its consent. It gives one County the privilege to build a bridge across a stream connecting with another County without the consent of the adjoining County. That is wrong. They ought to have at least the consent of the County adjoining.
Mr. GILMAN said the bill would meet a case in his County, and it would be detrimental to their interests in case the bridge is not built--that being a means of securing an outlet to the Chicago market.
Mr. EDWINS moved to recommit the bill to the Committee, with instructions to amend the County into which the bridge is run must give consent to the building of the bridge.
The motion was laid on the table.
The bill passed--yeas, 54; nays, 9.
A majority of the Select Committee to whom was referred the bill [H. R. 370] incorporation of Bridge Companies reported, recommending its passage with an additional proviso to Section 2. A minority of the same Committee recommended its passage with amendments to Section 1, restricting the Bridge Company to transport at a rate agreed upon, and if no agreement upon rates can be reached the Circult Court is to establish the rate for such conveyance.
Mr. MESSICK thought the adoption of the minority report would defeat the bill.
Mr. CAUTHORNE--I hope the minority report will not prevail. I do not think that any Company would be willing to spend $2,000,000 with a proviso that another Company could use that bridge, and if they do not pay as much as they think proper, they could go to the Circuit Court and have the rate fixed. The supposition is, if a foreign corporation builds a bridge costing millions of dollars, the State gets the benefit of the improvement. They are seeking to connect with the city of Chicago, and if that trade does not go through the State of Indiana, it will go elsewhere. They want the most direct line they can get between the South and Chicago. By building this bridge at Evansville, this State gets the benefit of it. I hope the minority report will not prevail.
Mr. FRAZER said ever since the bridge was built across the Ohio River it has always been exorbitant in its charges, and it went on until it was necessary to build another bridge along the side of it to overcome the monopoly. I thought we would put in a clause that would prohibit making such a monopoly as exists at Jeffersonville. I hope the minority report will be adopted.
The minority report was rejected and the majority report was made a special order for Wednesday morning.
