as are the questions growing out of Northern and Southern interests, it is not strange that the entire North is now inviting us to throw off our Territorial Government, and to assume the rights that pertain to a free and independent State. By order of the Committee. M. FRANK. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS IN RELATION TO JOHN ANDERSON'S CLAIM. The committee on Internal improvements to whom was referred the memorial of John Anderson in relation to his claim against the Territory for building a dam on the Milwaukee and Rock River Canal, having given the subject such consideration as their limited time would admit, submit the following REPORT: The committee find that a contract was entered into in due form, on the 8th day of October 1840, between the memorialist of the one part and the Milwaukee and Rock River Canal Company, of the other part, for the construction of a dam across Milwaukee river, on section No. 54 of the line of said canal. The contract was approved on the 30th of October, 1840, by George H. Walker, Esq., acting canal commissioner, pursuant to section sixteen of the "act to aid in the construction of the Milwaukee and Rock River Canal," approved February 26, 1839, as appears by the endorsement of said commissioner on the back of said contract now in the possession of the committee. By the terms of the contract the said memorialist was to construct and complete said work within the year 1841, according to the plan and specifications particularly set forth therein, and was to receive therefor the sum of twelve thousand dollars. In regard to the time and mode of payment it was stipulated and agreed as follows: “And it is further agreed that monthly estimates shall be made of the amount of work done which shall be paid to the said party of the first part within ten days from the date of each estimate, deducting ten per cent. from the amount of each until the whole amount of work done, shall be equal to two thousand dollars; after which the payments shall be made within four years of each estimate, with interest at the rate of 7 per cent. per annum; the whole amount to be paid in manner aforesaid for work specified in this contract being twelve thousand dollars, which is to cover all costs or value of materials used and all labor and workmanship required in the completion of the work." Mr. Anderson sets forth in his memorial now before the committee, "that he proceeded in the construction of said dam and completed the same agreeably to contract in the year 1842, and received his final estimate therefor, dated November 10th, 1842, after the work had been finished and accepted by the engineer." Of the correctness of this statement and of the full completion and acceptance of the work, the committee have no reason to doubt. All the various documents and vouchers in relation to the work done and money expended on this canal generally, were laid before the committee on Internal Improvements of the House of Representatives, at the last session, and appear to have been fully and carefully examined by said committee. In relation to the matter in question that committee say, in their report, [House document, page 379.] The two thousand dollars (on the Anderson contract) were paid as follows: 1841. May 1,|By Canal Commissioners, $607 50| June 1, " 66 July 14 66 June 66 "B. Kilbourn, Loan Agent 392 00 $2000 00 The estimate interests under this contract were made from time to time until the job was completed, and are as follows: 1841. April 30,JUnp'd on est. of this date] $67 50| 1.Am. of w'k done as prest. 14, Unp'd on est. of this date 66 55 00 1000 00| 56 11 66 August 1, 66 30, These several estimates will fall due on the expiration of four years from their date respectively with interest at the rate of seven per cent. per annum. The interest which has accrued up to the last day of December ult. is two thous and one hundred and eighty-eight dollars and seventy-eight cents." In addition to these statements deliberately made and reported to the House of Representatives and approved by it at its session, it appears that the Legislative Assembly afterwards in a memorial to Congress, approved February 24, 1845, represent the canal debt as follows: "There are now outstanding direct liabilities against the Territory on account of the canal to the amount of $15,059 43." The general sum here recognized as a direct liability of the Territory, embraces the amount due the memorialists with the interest as above stated, together with a number of other small claims, which were provided for in the act in relation to the canal land, passed at the last session, and which have been since paid out of the canal fund. The committee cannot doubt the full intention of the last Legislative Assembly, in view of the report of that committee and of the documents and evidences before them, to recognize the debt of Mr. Anderson as a just and legal claim against the Territory, which ought to be provided for and paid out of the proceeds of the sales of the canal lands, nor can the committee discover any reason drawn from the transaction itself which warrant a different conclusion. In pursuance of a law of the Territory an individual entered into a solemn contract for the performance of a public work, in aid of which Congress had made a special donation of land, and the Territory had consented to become its trustee in disposing of the land and applying the proceeds to the purpose intended. The acting canal commissioner, approved by the Territory and acting on its behalf in pursuance of law, examined and approved the contract. The contractor entered upon and faithfully completed the job, and during the progress of the work an engineer of the Territory appointed in conformity to law, made. the requisite estimates, and the canal commissioners acting upon these estimates, made payment to the contractor, from time to time, out of funds procured by the Territory, to the amount of over $1600, and the loan agent of the Territory paid the balance of $2000, in completion of all the cash payments required by the contract. What acts or circumstances can be conceived holding out stronger inducements to a contractor, to confide in the good faith of a public body, and go forward in the completion of a public work? The committee believe that it will not be contended in any quarter that Mr. Anderson did not in good faith enter into his contract, or that he has not in equal good faith fulfilled it by his private means, both in substance and in spirit. The unfortunate difference between the officers and agents of the Territory in regard to the canal fund, which have so prominent a part in the subsequent history of the canal, all occurred after the making of Anderson's contract, and after he had performed a considerable portion of the work. His legal liabilities were then upon him and all the part he has borne in these unhappy differences was to be made a sufferer by reason of the failure of the commissioners to pay the instalments and interest, which from time to time became due to him under his contract and the estimates of engineers. The committee have no disposition to assume doubtful claims, because they are chargeable on a fund furnished to the hands of the Territory by the bounty of the General Government, they regard the claim of the memorialist as a just and honest debt which the Territory owe and ought to pay, and they see no reason why payment should be refused or delayed. There can be but one sound rule on this subject. Public bodies should meet their obligations. The power to withhold furnishes no excuse for refusing to pay. What would be wrong in an individual debtor is both wrong and oppressive in a government. Honor, good faith and sound policy alike demand of the Territory to ascertain carefully and accurately all of its just liabilities and then acknowledge them manfully and provide for them at the earliest period practicable. In the present case the memorialist waited long on the payment to him of what he had faithfully earned and greatly |