Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1848-12-19

mics, owing 10 The connection between them, lher
this ACT to be void, or else 10 remain in in
force"
The terms contained in the foregoing, includ
ing The provision for umpirage, were rejected b,
the company, at their annual meeting in MAY
last. After This, think ii i'll becomes the Pfesi
dent of that company TO launl US with an uncom
promising spirit, and, al The same time, make
professions Of willingness 10 submit TO the umpi.
rage OF the Board oil Public Works. II they
would reject such terms as these terms under
which they toou!d be safe, but which would have
lett The Louisa company al their mercy in many
things difficult TO provide for,-and also refuse
the intervention Of an umpire, what terms would
they expect 10 obtain7 There is no question in
controversy between the two companies which is
proper subject for arbIralion-no question in
volvins pecuniary consideration, which the
Louisa company is not willing 10 submit 10 the
decision OF The Board OF Public Works, or any
other disin'ereslen lribuna-bul | do most frank
ly acknowledge, that The Louisa company IS not
milling to submit question OF liberty to any ,ri.
bunal;-they are not willing 10 submit 10 any lri-
bunal 10 say whether they shall use The opporu.
nity which the law gives them, 10 break loose The
chains which have bound Them so long.
frankly declare that the Louisa company is
no. willing 10 depend on any contract. Pracli-
cal experience has taught US that there are SO
many thousand liule things, in relation 10 which
We are dependent on them, as we'll as The i'm
porlant matters olcollectins and holding our mo
ney, and transporting our freight, in which a
contract Could not protect our interests 81 there
t00s any disposition to annoy us, we have con-
cludcd that Ihe only safely is 10 separation, espe-
cal as that is he only way 10 obtain our OBJ
JecIs OF getting near the shipping, with all lis
| resulting advantages, and arpfopralng 10 our
| selves The main profits OF our own busness-yiz:
on b. lower seotian
IL is now M duty, as promised, TO state, in
addition IL general objections to relying on con-
tract, some specific reasons resulting from The
experience under Inc present contract, why we
cannot rely on any contract, inasmuch as a re-
course 10 law is altogether inadequate in such
cases.
Isl. By The contratt, the Louisa cars are taken
to Richmond By them without unloading and,
oil course, have TO be returned BY them. H.
stead oil being promptly returned ready to be Ia
Ken upon the Louisa road for freight, part cf
those carried doun have been left 81 TINS since
lst January IN the busiest tune Of hauling, fre-
quentiy as many as 3 or 10 are ieh Tin spite OF The
complaints OF The supplementary when The
Louisa depols are crowded almost TO breaking
down
2nd. The superintendent OF the Louisa road
has been notified TO stop his freight trains more
'bnH oHCri ~ iH'H GtpOl was luIi
3rd. Three times in the last month they have
failed 70 meet our loaded train, permitting il 10
remain in the Junction "a hours, not knowing
but there might hr live stock, fresh meats, or
other freight, feqliring Immediate delivery.
Alb. By controct they collect our money: when
they think proper 10 sci up a claim against The
Louisa Company, they retain The amount in their
hands, in despite OF our solemn protest, and, in
one case, amounting 10 upwards oil $500, refusing
10 submit The case 10 reference.
5ih. The bags which the company furnish for
grain are obliged 10 go 10 Richmond. In conse.
quence OF the utter inability OF the Louisa Com
pany TO enforce any particular system for taking
care OF them, nearly 5000 were lost last year.
9th. By contract When losses occur in
transportation, not clearly chargeable to one
company, The two are to bear the loss rateaby.
No matter whether the loss occurs in freight
going up or coming down, they have the advan-
lage in position To fix the responsibility on the
Louisa Company; and we are annoyed with law
suits, in cases where We are willing 10 divide
the charge, unless we pay the whole.
7th. and morst Of ai.-The contract gives
the Louisa Company three quarters of a cent
ton per mile compen alton for the use of their
cars on the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Po
tomac Company's Road The general practice on
raj roads and canals, for the sake Of convenience,
had fixed 1000 pounds as the ton. | supposed
that was well understood, and claimed three
quarters OF a cent for every two thousand
pounds carried IN our cars MIR. Robinson con.
tended that the ton was two thousand two hun
dred and forty. | demonstrated, but gave up,
because had no redress. 10 settling for the
use Of our cars, they assume the ton to be tioo
thousand two hundred and for y pounds; but when
| they make out an account against the Louisa
n, ir0n nj frpi
which is charged by the ton, the ton t!en be-
comes ttco thousand pounds; and we are made to
pay tho rates of ton for every two thousand
| pounds. Our Treasurer demonstrates; but OF
what avail is in They have our money in their
hands: we have to oubmit the account is set
| tled; and on the same sheet the ton is two thou
sand, when they charge US for hauling, and two
thousand two hundred and forty when they
credit US for the use of our cars.
| ask you now Messrs. Editors, after this de-
velopment, 10 say have not heretofore prac-
tised great forbearance instead of exciting pre-
JUDGES against the Richmond, Fredericksburg
and Potomac Company Has not the Louisa
Company good cause TO wish to be independent
If the contract bad been faithfully executed, it
is grinding enough, God knows. We have to
pay $500 per annum, to induce them not to
charge more per mile on their road than the
Louisa Company does for freight coming from
the upper points Of our road Passengers from
Gordonsyillc pay between the Junction and
Richmond, 81 so; while those coming from
Washington, who have travelled a similar dis
lance on their road, pay rate of fare equal 10
| about 81 between the Junction and Richmond
and much more of similar character, but am
| wcaried with the catalogue Of complaints.
The President says his company is disposed 10
-. l. -,
possible provided eucry bo|y will permit then
10 settle cUe,g thing their own way. Iii lille
remarkable, however, thai This amable corpora
lion, disposed 10 be at peace with the whole world,
should quarrel with every thing which comes IN
their way, from the owners OF The steamboat
line on James river up TO The Postmaster Gene
raj oil The Uniled Stares. They remind me OF The
foreman, who stood alone against all the rest OF
the jury: When asked by the Cour whether
they hal agreed On a verdict he replied No,
they could not agree. Pointing to The jury, n
said thai there were eleven OF the most obstinate
men he had ever met with And 50 suppose
Mr. Robinson thinks that all the steamboat and
railroad companies he has 10 do with, and The
Postmaster General, are the most quarrelsome
people he ever met with. For myself have
come 10 The conclusion, waving The question
which al our companies is most disposed 10 be
dictatorial, that The best way Tor MS Ia keep The
peace, is 10 have nohing 10 do win each Other.
as believe 1t is generally with all railroad COM
panies; and 50 | trust he will no, insist on con-
,inuIus tae connection any longer than is neces-
sary.
The President Of the Richmond, Fredericks-
burg and Potomac Railroad Company concludes
his rspy with 2 hrea ~ do some hing not def
nIiey explained, u. this Louisa extension is en-.
couraged." He has in store some awful ven.
seancc on Rich ond, or the Louisa company,
suppose. Now, should have thought, that The
lessons Of the las. two years might have taught
that company, that their policy OF coercion and
intimidation would not always answer. They
first hisd to lrehten the Louisa Company into
their terms Tor doing ihei! transportation. They
refused an offer from the Louisa company, which
would have given Them upwards Of $40 600 per an
mum. The Louisa Conn any would not be fright
encd in'o submission-hav realized $4,000 by
doing their own transportation ana what have
The Richmond Ffedt ricks burg and Potomac