Rutland herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1823-1847, 1836-11-08
Legislature Of Vermont.
fFs- Uaii.@s Iaai. Jesn.al
DEBATE on THE BILL INCORPORATING
TIE RUTLAND RAIL ROAD BANK.

In ssssTR. Oct. rs.
Mr. Hebard said he had been favored With an on
poftuniiy TO examine the proy,ons OF tho bill and
found them To be similar to other acts Of incorpo-
ra'ion, gfsBtIng banks except the lstt krrt,on re-
lsiing 10 the stock holders IN Ruilsnd BANK. and
giving them an equhl amount uf stock IN the con
iemplsied Rad Road Bsnk Mr. II. said be did moi
Subscribe 10 the ultra doctrines OF The dsy con
demning IN gross, all banking nstitu,ious nor wa,
he on the other hand 10 favor Of reehsreripg bank,
1t were better that hew backs b. chartered. " hen
so disposed. could avail themselves Of eous, pryi
loges IN obtaining stock be was willing 10 20 10
favor ct the incorporation of banks so far as the
business and wants Of the community, nigh, re-
quire. lie concluded by moving 10 amend the bill
by erasing the last section.
Mr. Pierpont replied that the stock holders In the
Bank Of Rutland would have no possible objection
TO the motion just made to amend. The section
was not added at their suggestion, nor for their
benefit but, on the contrary. by the friends Of the
bill, whose object not bank but aRaa Road.
IL was the friends of internal improv ement not the
sticker Of moneyed institutions, who moved 10 this
measure. The great object aimed to accomplish,
was the construction Of an important rail roao aud
stock, To effect this desirable object 1t had been
thought BY competent Judges and ludicious friends
might more readily be subscribed for as conte N
plated in the section of the bill proposed TO be era
sed. than in any other manner.
Mr. Howe spoke in favor of retaining the last
section. on the ground. and under the full belief,
that If the present bill passed, the Rutland Bank,
through its stock holders, would not apply for a
renewal Of its charter. If they neglected 10 sub
scribe for stock in the contemplated Rail Road
Bank, and applied for renewal Of their charter,
hat application would come with an i'll grace be-
fore the Legislature, and with no reasonable hope OF
success.
Mr. Porter said he saw no evil that could arise
to the public from returning the last section, and
expressed hope that the motion TO amend would
not prevail.
Mr. Ilebard in reply to Mr. Pierpon. said the
project appeared to him TO be one IN favor Of the
stock holders in the Bank of Rutland he could
see no object, iii not the one they were now
stockholders, enjoying the privileges and pockctng
the profits of that bank--pass this BILL without a
mendmcnt, and they become also stockholders in
the Rail Road Bank, to an equal amount, il they
| chose to become soft not the next application
would probably DC to a new Legislature for a renew
al oftheir charter lie was opposed to a removal
of Bank charters on the score of principle; it vac
eSptsaty " good fsi.h 10 3Tie puSie; sasod policy
aud impartial legpratan S~fI Aheuld be Ich -ffs
for l6a,laasss, dsegjsy wHt sfe@ bgsA epj6y ed
for enc ~psst. the psopsSea Citing VI of Tho old
was no indemnity to the new bank. to the public OF
to the Legislature. Besides, the giving every
individual in community, DESTROYS Of doing So an
opportunity to subscribe stock in this contemplated
Rail Road Bank, in case the project proved unsuc-
cessfu the greater the number of stock holders the
less burden, and more equally borne and II sue
cessfuI, grerer number would share lis benefit D.
1.-THE amendment prevailed, as friend Of int erna
L MINI he miobt for In
Mr. pierpont answered, thsi the section, propo-
sed to be stricken out, had been inserted without
reference to giving exclusive or undue privileges to
stockholders IN the Ruiland Bsnk-they or their
Interests had uoi been consulted il had been done
to induce subs, fiptons &c the Rail Road and with
| that provision, he thought the stock might be sub
scrbed, and the wo.k 60 on bot II gentlemen
thought different, he would not urge OBJ ections &c
the amendment
Mr. Ranney said he should be grafed TO hes
a statement of facts from the committee on banks
IN relation to the bill. A Rail Road might, for
augh, he kpeH, be the object sought to be attained
or ii might be fent to efec the restoration of q
bank obont TO bs the limitation Of its charter
he would be graifcd in the receipt Of definite H.
formation Of the real object, It's extent, expense
praet,billiy, &c.
Mr. Porter OF The committee on banks, said ths
facts so far ne they were presented to the commit
tee, IN substance, were, that charter for RAJ
Road from Whitehall 10 Rutliud had been procu =
ed distance % mics the route practicable; es
timased cost $3.50 900 the present bill coniem.
plated bank Of $3.50 900 capital stock and tina
It's stockholders axe equal amount, cf Rel Roa
stock the bank and rail road condaDes IN be sep
srale. aud independent of each othet- the bank be
fore deriving any benefit from their charter. TO cub
scribe the rail road stock and expehd 500. 900 ii
it's construction.
Mr. Bell was in favor Of striking on, the section
but favor OF the general 7si"oiPe Of the bill. -
These principles hc Dad not regard as favorable "a
the bank of Rutland; bot most favorable 10 th
final construction Of The :all road, aud instead o
operating ss a favor TO toe Rutland Bank, woul,
prove q bonus to the public.
Sir Pierpont said the president and directors Q
the Rutland Bank would have objection to az
moiion--he had pone--the stockholders 10 tina
bank mad moi applied for the contemplated charter
renewal Of Their own
Mr. Howe described the route Of tie contempla-
ted rail road 10 accomplish which the oblec
Of the bill under consideration the route was lev
81 for survey had been made by the war depart