Burlington hawk-eye. [volume] (Burlington, Iowa) 1845-185?, 1851-01-09
-...- From the Iowa Republican.
Debate In the House of Repre- scntatives.

/ a. From the Iowa Republican
| Debate In the House Of Repre- scntatives.
| Friday, Dec. 27, 1880
ron the 9th Section Of the Chapter Corporations viz
"such Corporations may exempt the private property
ofts members from liability to Corporate debts by
provision that effect its articles of Interpretations
hut subject to the provisions Of this Chapter relating
/ thereto.') #~~#.
Mr. Folsom said-Iowa stands among
the States, in the first rank, as to the Con-
stitu:ional power of creating Corporations,
such as would not be tolerated in Massa
chusetts or any other State in the Union,
Our Constitution has thrown all open to
corporations, turning the very devil loose
to run up and down the whole Common
wealth with corporations. have no be-
lief in such offsprings of folly end rascali-
ty as may arise under the name of Cor
porations unrestricted. r have been born
with horror to them. Hence 90 for
this section, which protects the poor
stakeholder that invests his little all in a
Company; and which siiords some guar
anty against liability for The debts which
rascality or folly may create. Hence, l
am in favor of this clause, and its entirety.
have no belief in general aristocratic
swindling operation. Isbelieye in a char
ter binding and controlling corporation.
But we have put the wheels in motion,
and we cannot stop them. We have
opened the law wide aud free TO all Cor
porations by the Constitution, which au-
thorizes only general law of incorpora-
tion: and this being the best law we can
pass, would retain the clause to save
the'li;tle all of the poor from the grasp of
the rich. An examination of the whole
i Chapter, especially of the provisions for
the publication of the articles Of incorpo-
ration to the world, and sgains, their vio-
lation, or any fraudulent acts by the Com
pany, is further reason for retaining this
clause. 1t will save the poor stockhoider
! from having his little all wrested from
him, i'll case the Company should fail.
The settled policy OF Iowa is internal
improy ement, internal improvements cor
pora,ion, corporation. And since the
Constitution only allows a general law,
we must pass this. II we sit here to
guard the ri ghts of any, we must protect
the poor stockholders, the farmers, the
mechanics, laborers, and others who put
in their little savings. defy any one to
make better clause to protect them, and
guard their rights.
Mr. GILpEA-I do not rise to measure
my abilities with the legal gentleman Mr.
Folsom) who has just spoken. Bit
represent portion Of the people of Iowa.
must therefore speak in their behalf.
am surprised to see any member Of the
democratic party advocate such doctrines.
If it had been whig who had spoken
thus, | should not have been surprised.-
But to see a leader, and expounder of
democratic principles, ,stage s:ch ground,
I cn,,sa sc,s:i tue fsouSa. ,u.,r. ,,.~'s,-.~a
divided-that there were fifteen Wings
among us, SO that Democrats would not
take Wing ground, nor turn traitors, or
worse than traitors, to their principles
But to the remarks of the speaker, (Mr
| Folsom.) What does he mean by a
"poor stockholder ?" l can't see how he
expects to protect the poor s,ockhoder.-
Suppose man puts into Company $500,
I or more than the homestead exemption,
how can he be called poor stakeholder? :?
am in favor of binding the man that takes
stock for the profit Of it, so that the la
borer who does the work shall not lose
one dime.
Mr. BaBBlrr--I am in favor Of striking
out. 1t is argued by the gentleman from
johnson county (Mr Folsom,) that the
company are bound to publish their ar
ticles to the world, SO that the people can
know the conditions, and with whom they
contract. Very good.-But how can they
know when the stock is exhausted. The
company can know when the last dollar is
expended. And, if then, with their eyes
open, the company go on and contract
debts, onght not their private property to
be held liable for their debts? If two in
dividuals go into partnership, to the
amount OF 5000 or $1,000, do business,
and break up, they are held responsible,
to the amount of their private property for
the debts of the firm. SO a bridge or rail-
road company ought TO be made liable,
since company may know when the last
dollar is spent. A company is making
one out Of many individuals. If then,
many become one individual, they ought
to be liable, like an individual, to the
amount of private property possessed.
But the gentleman { Mr. Folsom) saws
the chapter limits the.-company in their
Indebtedness. Let him point out the sec
tion where they are limited, and | will
agree to the clausein question. If not, !
hold that the campany should be personal
ly bound, to the amount Of private proper
ty possessed, for the debts of the corpora
ton. Any work half finished, every
body knows, will not sell for cost a
Railroad especially will not; or canal,
for example, with one half tone what will
it sell for? And who is in fault? The
corporation. They have contracted TO pay
a hundred hands, on one section, and five
hundred on another section, and neither
section is finished, SO as to yield any in
come. How can one part now be sold?
If they have so done, as company, they
ought to be held liable to the amount of
their individual property, to pay the hands
employed.
But he (Mr Fo|som) says it is the
wish of his constituents. Mr. Folsom,
rising and expaining,) said it was the
wish of the people to have free corpora
.tions for internal Improvements
Mr. BADD1Tr continued--l know every
man among my constituents wishes every
! L. b,lJ 1;,blo c,~ L.. 49,: