Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1830-01-05

tolls, and crush the opposition. Would this b
competitiop' No individual could compete with
compensated and the evidence relied upon to estat
lish the enormous amount of profit MIR. William
commented, at some length. Were the estimates G
the gentleman from Chesterfield (Mr. Burfoot) cor
rect, the propretors of Mayos bridge ought to hay
amassed fortune of $4,000 900. Yet in point O
tact, Mayo's bridge was under two membranes
and ITsnt's bridge under one, for the purchase mo
ney. Mayo's bridge not SO profitable as ha,
been imagined. Mr.. w. narrated the circumstance
of the purchase of Trents bridge by the proprietor.
or Mayos, from which it appeared that purchase Ia.
been forced upon Mayo by circumstances, and tina
1t had not resulted from any wish to procure mono
poly. The abutment of the bridge proposed TO be-
built, must be lodged Mayos land and MIR. w
warmly reprobatcd the injustice of condemninp his
land III order that it might mlict him, a stiI
deeper injury. The mpolicy ofgranting the appli-
cation was obvious for it could not he expected that
/ individuals would exert enterprise ON the cree
ton of works for public advantage when liable to be
deprived OF the benefits which they expected TO
arise from it 10 themselves. The gentleman from
Chesterfield, admitted it to exceed the constitu
tional power ofthe Legislature to reduce tho tolls
at Mayos bridge, yet he wished to do that by a
side dow and indirectly, whit he acknowledged
could not be done directly. If the tolls were too HIGH
let the Legislature reduce theto what they thought
right, with the condition that if Mayo did not con-
sent SEMI !" Inc reduction the pr.ege Of new bridge
or eftecting that reduction Of tolls which was dcs
red by many AS to the amount of tolls on coal
Mr.. w stated that IN some instances, large fortunes
we're made by the Golfers single year. They
made the consumer pay tbs toll, and were they to
enlist the sympathy of the Legislatures at the ex-
pense OF the widow und her children whose support
depended upon the tolls OF Mayo's bridge, Mr..
W. contested the idea that the burthen of tolls
had had any influence over the property of Man
chester-or that any Of its inhabitants had es-
capped to Richmond for the purpose of avoiding
t :. oppression tor the corporation burthens of
Richmond far exceeded the oppression of the
tolls at Mayos bridge. 1t was true that the
privilege of building his Bridge had granted Mayo for
the Pnbc aud was not the
that he should collect tolls in consideration his rsue and
exend'ufe Was not this dle between the public
aud him. and is there less injustice violating that than any
other contract TO which the public party? Has Mayo
complied with tue conditions aud kept his bridge i'll order In
ton of this application and had Mayors bridge proved losing
concern we should not have found individuals coming
forward aud proposing share Mayos
Bridge had proved profitable, Others willing in
the advantage, but had been found willing
WIN Col Mayo In the untried experiment So would prove
~ all other cases None would he ound willing share tho
hazard OF experiment but after made and Succeeded,
those who refused 10 incur the sque desired share
eno,nnent Mr. " commented The injustice of
gnYg this spirit
Mr. Burfoot desiring to Mr Williams, but tine honr
being late motion of Mr. Miller OF Powaan the House
adjourned
SATURDAY, JAN. 2.
The House of Delegates 90 meeting, was eugagc,
Tor short iTne In receiving reports from the
al commuters and resolutions offered by members,
which will be noticed in their progress. The rule
of the House, which prohibits the reception of Pc
tops was suspended for the day. and petitions were
presented by Mr.. Minor and others
fhe House then Oh motion of Mr. Burfoot took UP
the report of the Committee of propositions and
grievances respecting a new bridge to be erected
from the city OF Richmond to Manchester which was
under discussion the day before
Mr. Burfoot who was entitled to the floor accor-
ding to parliamentary courtesy waived his right.
Mr. Booker of Amelia addressed the house in favor
OF the report He did not think that, because
necessary to Condemn the property OF Mr. Mayo
tor an abutment to the bridge permission to build the
hrfr0 nutrbft hn rkrft,c
chester wero not the only persons interested. He
thought II The House in possession of the number
OF drays and Wagons. he cared for pleasure car
riages, which passed this bridge, and the amount of
tolls paid, this information would mat eriay affect
its decision. Pbat the persons living On, the south
side of James river were willing TO pay reaso nable
toll
Mr.. Booker then commented ON the remarks of
DIR Williams and referred to the observations that
Mr. Mayo was twice incarceratedi for debt while
erecting his bridge He bought right to give tire
power to company to obviaie such eqnences
In future If 1t Thought that Mr. Mavo was
willing to agree to reduction Of his tolls it would
be found to be mistake. He thought also the CITY
of Richmond deeply interested in this question. He
had heard that millers of this city had offered pay
the tolls to induce wheat to he brought to this mar
ket. FTe thought Mr.. Williams, considering the in
terests Of his constituents ought to be in favor of
the report He spoke of the uniform liberalily Of
the member from Richmond in supporting the Cause
Of Improvement in every part nf the S,nte as an in
ducement to like beFnlity the part of the house.
Mr. Rutherford said, standing in the relation as he
did, he was bound by his duty to his constituents
take part in the discussion. lie disavuwed any hos
tllty to Mr.. Mayo personally. Hc would not enter
into the details efthe question but eonne himself to
the principles involved in it, Mr. r. said the ques-
ton was, did the public convenience require this
bridge? The memorial signed by so many citizens
was conclusive on this subject No one could be-
evu that the object was to deprive individual Of
bis property
Phe exorbancy of the tolls was uuqucstionabIy
Sufficient reason for establishing another BRIDGE
The tolls were not paid by the rich GOLFERS, but by
the Consumers OF Richmond, and in many cases by
the poor man who could i'll afford it. The coal
trade would be increased by the reduction Of tolls.
NlT. r.. thought it probable, nay certain, that
nrent9 Bridge would be permitted to 20 down BY
Mayo, as 1t was for his interest so to do. Should
hayos Bridge nc swept away by fresh, ought there
not to be another bridge3 That J,rents Bridge also
was frequently uPder wafer. IF public convenience
required it, there Ought TO be three four bridges
and If they were kept up it conclusive proof tha
the public convenience did require them This was
stronger case than Trents. Phe rejection twice o.