Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1831-03-03
VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE.
HOUSE OF DELEGATES
Trrr.HA~ Aa~A


HOUSE OF DELEGATES.
TUESDAY, march,.
communication was received from the ST. ate, sta
ing that they hal passed the bill iacosporsiag the
wheeling Fire and Marine lnsur ince Con pany''-
Aud that that they had also Pass d with smendm- nss
the bill ITO amend an act entitled an &c Incorporating
company to construct turnpike road from e ea.tern
side Of the Warm Spring Mountain 70 Harr souburx
10 tho county Of Rsctin nam and lin "To sms nd
an act authorizing the common council Of Lynehburr
to raise sum OF money by lottery. passed the 10th,
January 1880: That they sg'ce to the amendments
proposed by the Hou.s Of Delegates TO their amend.
msnts to the bill entitled Gao sc' forming eoun-
" out OF parts the counties Of Morgan, Greeohrier
Nicholas and Kanswha"-and that they nsi', on their
amendments to the bill Providing for the further
publication and sale Of the Map Of Virginia"
On this question considerable conversation took place
10 which Messrs. Venable and williams OF H. opposed
the amendments o. the Senate, and Messrs. Maxwell
and Williams Of 8. supported them.
Do motion OF Mr.. Williams Of Fl. the House insisted
IN It's amendments to the amendments Of the Senate
Inc Houses differ about the PIico-The II. Of D
provided that the large map. which sells for TWEEN
" dollars, should hereafter DO sold allow the
State one dollar profit on the fret cost, and the
small map Sh'ch sells for six dollars. .h,uld sell
for nifty cents profit. Tho Senate wish 10 tx the
four dollars.1
Mr.. Williams Of Shenandoah, from the committee
Of General Lave. recommended q concurrence with
the Senates amendments TO the bill "To incorporate =
eompanyto establish turnpike road from the nor
bank Of the RspPahaonock river opposite
&c
the amendments.
Mr. Eppes. from the committee of PROPOSITIONS and
Grievances.repored without amendment bill preserib.
ing tbs manner OF electug trustees for the town NJ
Middleburg 10 the county Of Loudoup &c And n.
also reported bill to enlarge the town Of Seo,,sviII. In
the county OF AlbemarIe MIR. Anderson of b. pye
sen..a a pemnon Of the euivators OF tobacco in the
counties bordering the James river and ito branch.
o. asking Tor reduction OF the tolls upon tobacco pass.
ing through the James river eanai:-Rsferrei to the
respective committees.
On mot on OF Mr. Rutherford, the report Of the com
mt co OIL propositions aud Grievances, declaring rea.
sona6te the memorial OF Mrs. Abigail Mayo, relative
to the BRIDGE from Richmond to Manchester and re-
leasing TO the Legislature the right of gulatux he
tolls was taken up and read.
Mr. Rutherford moved 10 amend the report, nv s,r.
words be rejected"
At the suggestion of Mr.. Leigh. the memorial Of Mrs.
Mayo.was read.
Mr.. Rutherford said that having presented memo.
rial from many ofhis constituents for the iucorpora
ZION OF company TO construct bridge from Richmond
to Manchester, felt II incumbent on him to oppose
proprieioSs OF May6ss Bridge. The '6rst question.
however, TO be determined, was not whether a new
Bride should be erected notbut whether was pro
PSF ana expedien Tor the legislature to take under it's
care the euaion o. The tolls of Mayos bridge as pro-
p'sed ~ the petition Of Mrs. NJ. large number Of pc
tons having been presented In favour Of ne brid
Oh which the committee had reported avorabiy, the
House eoneurripg In its decision bill had been intro
duced, and was now on its passage. And IL seemed
10 him grave question wheber, after all this. the
House should take the subject Of tolls into considera
Satisfactory to the people.
The petitions were very numerous, and from wide
extent OF territory; and they clearly showed that the
present tolls were opprcssivetha tho people were
impatient to BE- relieved Of this monopoly and In the
were DESTROYS, OF enjoying the advantages Of
which Tree competition was sure to keep up. He was
aware that evils to the parties sometimes grew out OF
composition; but they were generally temporary-Bn,
composition the best regulator. IL secured The peo
PIE nst eIhorbant charges, and therefore wor.
my oil encouragement. Ii the course ponted ont in
the petition from Mrs. Mayo followed IL seem ed 10
Nc. r. that Il might be looked upon as a claim upon
future Legislatures If the tolls 6xed by the Le-
ssature now, might II not herea be construed into
Legislative grant to the propreto tors of Mayo's Bridge
and their heirs through all time? Might il not be con-
soered 40 exclusive privilege to those proprieors
ever!-He thought that the claims now made 10 favor
seemed to warrant such an anticipation. He saw no
merit 10 the offer made by the petitioner to submit TO
reduction Of TOLLS and /, made until il was
ound that all efforts to prevent the wish of the people
were vain. And Why did they consent to reduction
OF their toll! Because they hoped to Obtain an en-
elusive privilege from the Legislature He felt conf
dent that such argument would be used after
II the prayer Of the memoralisi was granted He wa.
authorized 10 this conjecture, becaues the nj OF
he counsel OF the moiast fresh IN hts me
moIy urging the claims of Mrs. MAYO 10 be prote
against the composition now threatened. And would
not these arguments be pressed with teno
after the Legislature had interposed 10 the affair of the
propretors that no other bridge should be aowed a.
il would injure the partie.1 As to fixing tolls At rea
sonable rates il difficult task II was veil known
that the tolls which were thought reasonable forty
years ago, would new be excrbitant So the ols biei
might be reasonable now might be exorbant here af
ter 10 Legislation the future we'll az the prese
ought to be provided for. They were to Iegisate 70,
po'seri,y and no state Of things ought TO be sanc,iond
ed which would impose unjust burihens on those who
were to succeed kem. The erection of bridge acros.
the James River might hereafter be needed fer obe,
purposes than the reduction of tolls An increased
commerce and population might render another brid
essential tor the convenience Of the people. IL NIGH
be found necessary for railroad from some ntero,
part, to cross the river at hmopd. But IL would be-
asgued that these bridges would reduce the tolls q
Msyos bridge, and doubtless they would be oppos
ed. III bridge were established, ID was the du
~ OF the Proprietors 10 keep II 10 repajr-Thj.
had not been the case with Msyo's bridse. A,
early as the year 1913. when Edward Trent gave
bis evidence 10 the House. it was proved that Mayo'
bridge vi" dangerous for wagons. As so,n as Trent
bridge was built, Msyo's bridge was repaired. Tn,
same neglect would happen again, we're 70 obe,
br'ge evr to be built. Indeed, he commended that
was not better now ihan II 10 1918; and IL thi
petition wero granted, he believed that Trens brdg
would be cut down Another question was, whether
new bridge could be erected to pay the tho Gully am
produce profit fair division OF the business Tn,
very fact that individuals we're willing TO embark thei
capital Ia the project was oeonesbc proof Of IN.
fact But more positive proof could DO given. III.
then road extracts from the evidence Of three persons
who previous 10 1918 were collect at Mayos bridge
and who agreed that the receipts for four years
to that time were fifty dollars dsy-om this data Mr.
X argued, that II was evident Two bridges could b,
supported. handsome profit would be left 10 Mrs
slider injustice 10 advocate any psn by which ths
rights OF Mrs. Mayo would be injured, we're he no
convinced that COL Mayo and hs family had long sin
been amply compensated for his abors and enterprise