Litchfield enquirer., 1849-06-28
The Railroad from Boston to FIshkIlI.

Il is well known to our readers tina
the enterprizing citizens Of Boston have
determined to place their metropolis il
direct communication with the grea
West, by means Of a Railroad to connec
with the Erie Railroad. Charters hat
already been granted, extending from
Boston via. Providence to Hartford. Ii
our House of Representatives. on Wed
nesday last, the resolution was called up
merging the Hartford and Providence
with the Hartford and Fishkill Railroad
Company, Incorporating them as one
Company, under the title d "The Hart.
ford, Providence and Fishkill Railroad
Company"
The annexed report Of the debate on
the subject, in the House, will be read
with interest:
Mr.. Timothy Cowles in the chair.
Mr.. Kendall, Of Derby, offered an
amendment, providing that this road shall
act have power to construct road to
Winsted through New Hartford, as gran
ted in 1917, bat shall be limited to con-
strict as far as New Hartford.
Mr.. Kendall advocated this amend
meat on the ground that the Naugatuck
road was entitled to that ground, and its
business.
Mr.. Smith, Of Hartford, replied, show
ing it to be a legitimate track for the
road under consideration-that it belong
ed to the Pennington, and not to the
Naugatuc valley. a.f. G-.r..
Mr.. HaInlin, of New Milford, sustain
ed the bill, in opposition to the amend
meDt. @
Mr. Wheelock, of Winchester, pro-
tested against the repeal OF the branch
road to Winchester, to accommodate the
Naugatuck road. The people of this
town wanted their heavy goods, iron and
grindstones, direct from Hartford. If
the amendment passes, they must go
nearly 90 miles out of their way-and
they protested against paying this trib
ute. The people of Winchester have
$4,000 towards this road, and now they
wanted direct communication, as provi-
ded In the bill. rs ,7
Mr.. Kendall commended that the heavy
goods could be procured in another quar-
ter as readily as from Hartford, and that
Winstead really belonged to the Nauga-
tuck valley. He could see many reasons
why the amendment should prevail.
Mr.. Bronson, of Winchester, argaed
that the accommodation granted to the
people of his section of the State in
ls47, should not now be taken away from
them. They had right to it, notwith-
standing the Naugatuck road has char
ter to run near that point. He contend
I'd that the Naugatuck would not meet
the wishes and the wants of the people
of Winchester.
Mr.. Smith pointed cut the boundaries
of Winchester, showing that it was clear
ly in the Pennington valley.
Mr.. Welton of Cheshire said that
railroads were sensitive. He should vote
for this bill, and hoped his Hartford
friends would not hereafter oppose the
tow path going to Springfield, as they
did last Winter. "
Mr.. Smith, Of Hartford, agreed, that
Railroad Companies were sensitive; lie
had, himself, given offence by remarks
made some days since. But be would
repeat, that the opposition did not pro-
coed from Hartford as town or city.
but from the III. & N. HI. Railroad Co.
He had not on the former occasion, and
would not now blame or find fault with
that Company. He merely stated fact;
and he would say further, that there was
not Board Of Railroad Directors in this
State who would have acted differently
in the same circumstances, and he doubt
ed whether there was a member Of the
House who would not have done as they
did in like situation.
The amendment was rejected, and the
bill was then passed.
The route of this railroad, as last sur.
veyed, passes through Litchield.