Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1853-11-02
For the Spectator.
Central Railroad.

l.
guilt of unparalleled NAL admlnlslfallonI cs,
when arraigned thereon, Of having skuikee i'on'
an expanation-and also presents an imposing ar
ray of figures calculated, il not intended 10 ihis
lead the unwary reader. desire, in aplaln way
not by authority or as any mans man, out Simply
to vindicate the truth-to put an extngnlsher up
on some of the reckless assertions IN MS articie-
And first as to the gravest and Leading cha'se'
"usurpation."
It is fresh in the memory of all, that before the
Junction extension was but,our railroad was suo-
jected TO annoying and oppressive dliiicuilies py
reason of its unfortunate dependency upon the
Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac CohlPa-
ny--that that Company extorted the most eAT :.
bltant charges from us for carrying our lre,en'
and passengers land seemed bent on using It's Guar
tered power 10 coerce our road to be It's mere uiD.
utary and appertinence. Its arrogant and unlus'
course induced the Legislature to attempt 70 REM
edy the crying wrong. A law was passed warren
81, lS48, by which it was enacted that me caPi-
tai should be increased TO extend our roao rom
the Junction to or near the dock in Rlchmono I;
that the road should not enter the City without
the consent of its council that it should not be
built if the R. F. and P. Company would "stpu,,
late and agree" to carry for us at fair rates and
other Just conditions prescribed, or submit the mat
ter to umpirage that if it refused all the condI-
tons. then, and only then the Act to extend should
take effect. provided the stockholders at their then
next annual meeting should accept it-(see act,
y. 1887. In virtue of said act the X. +. and +.
Company was respectfully urged to come to rea-
sonable terms. or submit to arbitration, and every
proper mode of amicabe adjustment was made, but
all were peremptorily rejected and theprovlsons
of the act were formally declined, by resolution at
their annual meeting, May 20, l848. At the
next annual meeting of the stockholders If our
road. held July IL, Is4S-(see proceedings p.
Ply Gen. Gordon offered the following resolution
-Irecitng in the preamble the fact Of said rejec-
ton :)-"Resoved. That this Company accept
the provisions of said rected act (of Legisature),
and that the engineer of this Company be reques-
ted to make survey and estimate of the cost OF
constructing the road from the Junction to Rich
mond. and if no unexpected difficulties are dlscov-
cred, that the Board take the necessary steps to
have the funds raised by subscription OF stock,wlth
view to the construction of the road as soon as
practicable" (Which was passed. Accordingly
the Board did what they were empowered and
commanded to do. And at meeting OF the stock
holders held April 90, lS49, on motion of Cen
Gordon, it was unanimously Resolved, lhat
the stockholders approve the conduct of the Presi-
dent and Directors of the Company for the promp-
ttude with which they have carried into erect
the wishes of the Company, expressed at their last
annual meeting. by putting the work OF the road
from the Junction to Richmond under contract In
December last. and the judicious and advantage
Gus terms on which it has been effected" do
not deem it necessary to say more IN regard TO tne
change of usurpation for if the proofs now furnish
ed from the record will not suffice to satisfy every
one of the falsity of the SANDER, the unbeliever
would not be convinced if one should rise from the
crave TO testify. The action of the Board OF
which Col. Fontaine is only one, has been over
and over ratifed-and it is fair to presume, that
Mr. Stakeholder was present, either IN person or
BY proxy IA the meetings referred to- What de-
molishng rebuke do the records administer to the
accuser. and what triumphant vindicaton d"
they afford the accused
Mr.. Stockholders ignorance of recorded facts IS
only equalled by his ignorance of the topography
accessibility. value of ground nc OF the two points
in Richmond compared by him in his article. A
little observation OF enquiry will satisfy any one
that the present entrance to the City is the very
hest one for the eshort line" to adopt when it
shall be built. To have entered at the point he
suggests (supposing that the council would have
consented. which is more than doubtful,) vast
amount of grading would have been encountered,
yery high private and city damages would have
been demanded. for the city is much more thckiy
populated. and the price Of ground greatly higher
than where the road now enters-and The depot
would have been further from the dock and much
less convenient than the present site. The line a
dopted enters into the very heart of the city With
ont difficulty and without one cent of damages; the
grounds were purchased at about one-third,or less.
price than they would have cost had Stockholders
line been adopted-the depot is as near the COCK
as it is possible to get. the council refusing TO
hermit enrnes to cross Main street, no depot IS
needed on the dock as it can be approached, II
ever necessary. near enough by horse power.
Tn addition to the charge of usurpation, Col.
Fontaine is held 10 account for the difference be-
tween the cost of said extension &C., and the cost
of the talked of 'shoit line with interest added
Mr.. Stakeholder, in this count o: his prosecution
shews that he is either very green himself. or IS
troubled with delusion & therefore believes his
readers are soft enough to be misled by his fig-
ures. Every "sane man" knows that the road
did not start to come this way-that it was at first
a mere stem of the R. F. and P. Company, lead
inp to Louisa G.. H.-tbat then il was extended
to Gordonsville in the direction Of Harrisonburg-
that then. at the powerful solicitation of Abe
marie and Aupusta. it was extended hitherward
and hence IFS zigzag line. The idea of Short
line has been suggested, since Col. FOntaine. Of
his own lawless will, built the Junction extern
sion. and Mr.. Stakeholder truly informs US why
and wherefore subsequent events render 1t neces-
sarv 10 build a Short lne'-why then hold Col.
Fontaine responsible? But the most amusing
mart is. that after demonstrating the necessity of
short line, the facts showing that Col. F. is not
in fault for our not having il now-he Is candid e.
= L II
nough to admit, accidentally. that when 1t shall
be constructed the present line will not be aban-
doned. but can he used or disposed of advantage
ously. His facts and arguments prove that his
premises are false. shall not waste ink in en-
deavorng to show the fallacy of the cypherng.
by which he exposes himselfin his efforts to make
honest people believe that Col. F. has by NAL ad-
ministration squandered near ST 100000. A ty-
gro in his first lesson in the rudiments of chid's
arithmetic, would blush to acknowledge himself
the author of the sum.
The object of stakeholder is quite apparent
He is one of clique who are using every effort
to prevent the reelection of Col. Fontalne to the
Presidency They are making charges without
proof, appealing to county pride, and sectional pre-
iudices. and putting forward competitor of much
personal popularity but it is hoped that the voters
will not be caught in the snares they are setting
have some acquaintance with Col. Fontaine's
official character, and take occasion to say that for
unhaggng energy. practical knowledge. undivi-
ded devotion to the duties of his office. enlarged
and liberal views, and fitness for the post he has
so long ana honorably filled. through its adversely
into prosperity, he will compare favorably with
any Rarnad President it has been my fortune to
have heard Of join cordially with his accuser
in asking an investigation into his administration
feeling sure that the judgment of his impartial tri
ers will be-''well done good and faithful servant
AUGUSTA.
Trouble AMONG THE CAMpBELITEs.-The