Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1850-01-25
IA n, Editors of The Eaouirer.

TO The Editors Of The Enquirer
Gentlemen In your paper Of the 2lst January, is arf
Gle which requires ri brief notice The writer takes
great liberties with the history of facts in connection with the
bill pending before the Legislature Tor guaanyng The bonds
ut the Louisa Company.
Although ii is Il Of no serious Importance whether
the statements b. the writer is not war
nied by facts in saying that III was expressly stated by
NC at the Company desired only the liberty 10 prosecute
the work their resources. The application for The
from citizens Of six eight counties BY petition
and not from The President OF the Company,
The Legislature has said that The Eastern extension
Of the Louisa Road was they had pledged themselves not
allow. The charter was passed with ttc or no oppose
ton seeming la be- conceded that ii the Richmond Fredtr-
cksbure and Potomac Company would not transport on the
same terms with the Louisa Company, the road ought
he made and That they refused 10 do All the Court. Of
the Comnonw eah have decided that there is violation
faith in granting The extension charter The decision aocs
beyond what has been stated The right Thu r
road il estahi>hcd The unrestricted right Ia carry freight j.
clearly sustained and, understand H. also The general
right carry all the passengers we expect tocarry rcserN
| I, the Richmond Fredericksburg and Potomac Company
merely a remedy. II Mc Louisa Company shouM rebate the
rights secured bv the 32,h section Of their charter which
violation will nevcrpractcaly occur will however thank
tcm publish the decision Of the Court They applied for
appeal and il unanimously refused.
The violent opposition making is an after thought. II
did cxhib itself when the bill passed In 1876 II,
when so many rIitlsS efforts were sl to compromise
and when offers Of arbitration rejected the Board
of Directors pooncd for charter, but bill offered
the House. Two gentlemen, then members Of the Board
Messs Charles Thompson Of Hanover and William Over
Of Louisa have just stated 10 me- that the President
the Richmond Fredericksburg and Potomac Company learn
ng that designed asking for charter an independent
road obsory cd that they would make no opposition II
seems, therefore, that they could that ue have sup
posed extension violation Of their rights
submit i, every sincere friend of improvcmcntcvcry
who desires the products Of the country b. brought
market cheap rates, whether those interests are
promoted by countenancng the claims up by the Rich
mond Fredericksburg and Potomac Company To nonop0lisa
the whole transportation between tide water and the Ohio
north James Ri,cr Whether they will tolerate the idea
that road being wall of partition between the East and
West, unless they graciotsy aIor communication across
their line
The suggestion that another road ought be made be
the Louisa ioad and the James River riyalln both
these improvements is absurd nconsisicn. and contra
dictory all the writer's main positions that j. scarcely
worth notice. But The little boon asked BY the Louisa
pany which will cost the State nothing, and will the
Commonwealth stockhoder from loss which may be
considerable in The possible sacrifice Of the companys bonds
is be refused forsooth because the charter when first
soning bur few of the Railroad companies in the State
would have received any aid The pursued in the
charter carry road the Dock is the usual
To grant the naked charter frs. and determine afterwards
whether any kind of aid from the State would be wanted
Is not this the pursued when they obtained char
ter! Was not that the pursued with the first
charter vi the Louisa company 10 90 10 Lonsa Court
House, with the Virginia and Tennessee road and nearly
every other i'll the Stael
trust the Legislature will only repudate such
soning that, bur also the oJous doctrines Of monopoly
which nre involved in their claims
Respectfully F.. FONTAINE.
O.fcc IF Louisa Railroad Company Jan. -, 1850.