The Athens post. [volume] (Athens, Tenn.) 1848-1917, 1851-05-23
THE RAILROAD.

previous notice the Board OF Directors OF
the Railroad assembled on the 10Th, and TO
some extent reviewed the action of the
former meeting. No Interference, believe.
was made against the principle controlling
the former meeting IN reference 10 Repair
Shops. And cannot see that The interests
of the Stockholders have been snbserved
bv the result o. the meeting. and cannot
see that the people OF lower East Tennessee
have much ground for congraru'a,ion in
what has been done upon the subject. For
my own par, am not so welded 10 any par.
ticu'ar locality as 10 wish the shops placed
TO sun me. in de'riment 10 the best interests
Of the Road. Far from it: i, is true. how-
ever. that nv first choice is the county in
which reside. Bu' in the name Of Safe
pride. as we rs al domestic Tennessee
Interests, t,r-o, t;yins he reasons for
'oc,'ir- '~s Secrs in Georgia. TIE Read
snow rGnr'~- SIX . seven nl,.ss 10 Ten
-sssss. ~ :cn; =, -';:s = fcu-& II thai:
',.'ar:s s,"aA i,-sCch a. ss:a -',~ ,
W ta:,,.-s : q: ;S-sr5 ;rs icris Q -
Nr~ra-r II 81. cun >-a's. whs- %: =
'-rs " ,:r,r:, o.-f;, '.i-s C.E,-irr
- ?: -,sss - syot7 fs-.ta ca' = '-:
Sac. Tee. : SEQ CIR Were ~ c..
rany tays c.-s I? - syrsrsa Il tcl.
s'rucrng "I' io' ne r0-rosa Of turning
the Locomotive. WHY not put the es'ah-
ishment there this side Of the State line!
may be considered selfish. ilIhernl or old
fashioned. hut go for my own State al
though the appropriation may not exceed
$500. The people Of Tennessee are
building the Road, and the people of Ten
nessee are entitled to every benefit, great
and small. that can be derived from it, com
sistenlly with the interests OF the Compa-
ny. Those. OF course. are first 10 be con-
suited. And cannot for the life of me,
see how hey are more suhserved BY ex-
pending the $500 upon this subject in
Georgia. than by spending that amount at
the Blue Spring. or al Cleveland. The 10
cation of Repair Shop at Dalton is in
delensi5le, when the very same results can
be accomplished by locating in the State OF
Tennessee.
But it was my intention in this article,
TO make few suggestions upon the sub.
jeci of preferred stock, which | understand
was introduced by resolution before the
Board. have not given the subject much
reflection, but think can see many OBJ
jecIions 10 it. First, this Company has no
right under its present position. TO issue
any of such stock. The original Stock
holders must be consulted. and the State
having a very large interest in that way at
stake. must likewise assent to it, before the
thing can be accomplished. This she can
only do through her law'making power,
and if the mex, Legislature should pass an
&c, authorIsing it, and then, If the original
Stockholders or majority in Convention
should consent 10 il, the Board could legal
" issue such stock. An act Of the Legs
laiure must precede any action uPoa the
subject, and therefore, under existing cir
cumstances, The Company have not the Legal
right to do it.
But, independently of the question oI
power. think it can be clearly shown that
it is inexpedient to pursue such line oil
policy. 1t is unjust 10 the original Stock.
holders. II it was merely in the nature oil
a Bond, to draw six per cent. only, and 10
cease to have its priority even that far when
the Road is completed, it might not in that
view be unjust. 1t would then be merely
a six per cent. Company Bond convertible
into the stock of the Company and to be
placed upon an equality with the old stack,
upon the completion of the Road. In that
view it would be considered another meth
cd Of borrowing money. But, in the man.
| ner proposed, il would be unjust to the
original Stockholders in this: it would cre>
ate upon the Company perpetual debt,
with an eternal guaranty Of six per cent,
with no hope Of ever being able to escape.
Six per cent. must be made for the prefer
red Stockholders in all events. even If those
who have suffered for ten years in the out.
lay of their means are unable to reap a
dime. But II does not stop here-il from
the nett earnings of the Road the Compa-
nv should be enabled at any time to declare
dividend Of ten per cent, the preferred
shareholder gels his ten per cent. as well
as the other. IL there any justice in that ?
AS Stakeholder prefer The policy of is
suing Bonds at six per cent, when those
Bonds can be sold at par, TO the policy Of
issuing new stock OF any kind whatever,
either preferred or not. am one of those
who believe that within three or four years
alter the Road is completed to the Tennes-
ssee river, il will declare dividend OF ten
per cent. Out Of this ten per cent, Bond
holders will draw but six. and the other
four per cent. will Of course be divided
amongst the Stockholders But suppose
these Bondholde-s were preferred Stock
holders, what would be The result2 Why,
of course, they would draw the entire ten
per cent. and the original Stockholders