Burlington hawk-eye. [volume] (Burlington, Iowa) 1845-185?, 1851-01-16
che Gawk-GDc.

ron rERxs IN DETAIL, sss rixsr rAos.
eN~~~~>~~>>~~~~ ~@>>>~~e~>S>>>~'~
Stealing whis Thaader.
We are glad to see some Of our opponents aoop'-
ise whig principles. Whenever we see ms, We
t,el more like congratulating them on their good
taste and sound judgment than in blaming them for
sAei. past blindness. The struggle that has been
eoine on In the legislature in relation to the Ind-
Sidual Liability principle, is a. nomentuous as it
A Interesting. We think there is one very i'm
po,tans point involved in the creation Of corpora
lions for laudabe objects, which is frequently lost
airht al, and which should be viewed as the COM
pensating balance that outweighs the loss the law
apparently sustains in not having the same grasp
ON individuals when combined as 1t does on indi-
vidusls In detail. That point is the absolute gain
community secures In the creation Of these iauda-
bile combinations. On the principle that the labor
Or n worthy of his hire-on the principle that we'll
directed strength merits all that il accomplshcs,
sspeciaily where without that amount Of strength
sssai.s could be accomplished, we would plead for
an acknowledgement Of this compen sating intiu-
enes. In union, every body knows, there is
strength. Whatever can be secured BY union that
could not be without itshould be credited to union
The strong cable will hold the largest ship to its
moorings against storm and tide, while the indi-
vidual strands that compose il might be strung all
over the ship and they could not hold il an instant
20 companies made up Of individuals can accom-
plish that for the benefit of community, whirh as
indiyiduals never could be done. They may make
rail roads or plank roads bridges they may build
mills or factories; aye, they may establish banks
end insurance offces, even. Will these companies
b the sole gainersp Nay, verify. II there was no
benefit to the public-no reciprocity OF interest
then We would say discourage them by all means.
Cripple them BY the most stringent legislative &C.
ton. Lat them have no foothold in our state.
But they may b made beneficial and desirable. By
tho Improvement In the roads the farmer can get
his produce to market cheaper and more speedily
than before; here 10 gain to the farmer, which he
could not realize without such improvement. We
cay nothing Of the benefits derived BY other classes
OF industry from the same cause.
In the formation Of companies for extensive man.
nfaesuring business Of any description, there is
manifest reciprocal benefit. The more extensive
the better. Large numbers of hands are employed
20 carry on the labor Of these companies. They
must be fed. A homo market is thus created that
always enriches the farmer, mechanic, and In fact
Ill classes. We said, even banks may be benefit.
10 say nothing Of the facilities afforded to
chants in purchasing 1t high prices the produce Of
tAe country, We see in the loss Of interest alone
Which might have been saved to the citizens Of our
ssats on the six hundred thousand dollars paid out
Tor pork the present season, that banks Of our
owa are desirable, il We must have bank paper as
. circulating medium among Us. Insurance ofices
q our own can be to be more desirable still.
From eight to ten thousand dollars are probably
paid In this city alone Tor premiums to agents for
foreign companies. We presume this proportion
viii hold good in towns throughout the state. This
vast amount ought to belong to our citizens, in
eonpasiss composed Of themselves a. stockhold-
ere.
We have said nothing in the above ofthe en-
hsseed value Of property incident to the creation
ct these Companies and the thousand other eollat-
ssal advantages sccruing to the public. We have,
however, said enough 70 show ell, We think, that
tie public is enriched in proportion to the number
sad sfciesey Of railroad, plank road and manufsc-
turing companies that may be incorporated in cur
midst. II we can't have them without making their
Individual members liable for their individual pri-
vats property, then can't have them at ALL That
10 settled. Can our state afford to do without them?
We think not. lit is constitutional to include
he individual liability clause in the act incor-
poration, the compromising benefit sccruing to the
public would make it unjust to require it. We
hope we have by our studied reiteraton of it, made
The point plain. so that all can understand it. 1t
% simply and In Short that as the reciprocity OF
gain between the companies and the pubic is mu-
tual, justice demands that companies, comforting
shsse advantages on the public, which individuals
could not do, should not be viewed or treated as
individuals, but ~ benefactors so long this
iprocity Of interest is kept up. Even the Gazette
Of yesterday Acknowledges the principle which we
Aavs endeavored TO eiucidate, by declaring that
'sws regard the enhanced value OF land consequent
upon public improvement as part of the consider
sso~ paid BY company for their corporate p'ir'escs
u not to purchase an exemption from individual
liability for the debts of the corporation, what 9TH
q privileges are intended?
We know that there are some who combat the
posi,ion We have taken. Those members Of the
legislature and of the press who insist upon the in
dividual liability clause-who can see no differ
eace between persons and corporations-may not
haow or mean it, but they are Gripping the ener-
siss and damming up the prosperity of this young
end wouid-he thrifty state to an extent that must
stint ts growth and weaken its strength for years
10 come. This principle is recognized most fully
IN the advocacy Of not making the wife's property
liable for the husbands debts, and if we mistake
not, some who deny this distinction in cases ofin-
eofporaSed companies, acknowledge it in the mar
stsge partnership. We need not say that such are
Inconsistent. The intelligent and worthy editor
- the Miners Express cites recent debate in the
senate to fortify his attachment to the individual
liability principle. He looks upon the views ex.
pressed b some ofthe democratic Senator's as thew
sfs cotncident With his own, proof not only of
shs Correctness Of the sentiment, but also of the
Sntsy Of his party on the subject But he will not
siIew that Mr. Underwood, whose remarks he quotes
+" democrat, and he advocated making the prop-
my Of individual stockholders in the ceorrc,own
insurance Company liable for the compsny.s deb,..
us seems 70 consider Mr. Borl,nd,s speech n.
most conclusive on the point. We presume h.
considers Mr. Boriand's two i,lussr,tion. =, n.
most ccgent portions Of his argument. mr n.;m.
sstnss II his nrst Illustration man EMPLOYING one
Aaaf Of his capital II the purchase Of farm wh;s
ne other half IL invested in some paving shoe.
company. The farm does not pay, and to keen il
up, instead Q: taking his own money which he h,.
invested In the stock company, ne torrows money
70 keep up his farm. The Gar m is still unremun..
rating and is finally sold for the owners liabilities.
He then asks who will deny that the mans other
BALI Invested in the stock company 10 liable for IN.
hsoss OF the farm? OF course zoe would not. No
pody would. He then expands his illustration. or
avss smother, which no seems to think quite con-
.lusiye In sunport nf he ,r~uu>,A n. .u~~..