The Portsmouth inquirer. [volume] (Portsmouth, O. [Ohio]) 1849-1855, 1853-04-01
The proposed railroad.

o
asenent n beginning ING next volume
The proposed Railroad. (.
q We had supposed that our citizens gene.
nlly. who had thought i, all upon works Of
internal Improvement, would Be unanimous
u ,ha,, ! ,n,o,sl ~ ~ ~ ,,ossa, ,;l,oad ~
Cineinnat; Nevs, ware ,ye D,o,s ss,ooisi,s
h,..v., ,,.n ,.hs,,' ~ l.. ,n.d 4 ~, COW
,,..,, a,,;,;a,, =. .;,.a $500 ,,o.,;o,,
49,, wv l,l ~, -, 2. .,se ..a..
s,.s...,.,. q. ~. ssai;... I ~. aS,a ~
i.i. ~ Al. A. ..s !. .sse - -.
- -. ]. ..,;.. .,..s ~. -.
!, .,o,.. ,,S;aa,s sss 49,, a.,.,, ~.
Nh. I. ~. s =, ~. Il.
.ss.,,. 49, 80 e - -,
rr.s i...,s. ~ - s.-. ..-.,.. - -. \.
.,;,..,s.-. y Al -, .:,-,s,,,ssvs So,atog
4. q, ,y,,sn n soes q for,wara n mnst Il
/. -d,.sssa alono hv toycs .,d ,,o,rsS We do
M q !. ~, ,boss snts,t.i,,ns ,,cS t..,;na.
i. -. ;u,s,s.,sa = ~ ,,,c.,,.,;,v 80 ,So
,eo,n,rv. ,ye b.l;svs ,h., hs,. X, :. b.sr,.
Mi ,hsy cer,a;nIv s,,fIFsy ,bsp,.ive. = be ia
,vs, f,om ,b,. e,,,,.al .,sls., (, .on,a' 80.
.,s.a,.aa.;,,a..,;,., ..h:.l w
,,;,a,. 49,. ~; MI .It.-.-.. !
.n;,,s,,,,...h,a ons,.a,., :,
.;on. = ~se'N'
The objection. ,be onlv o,,s WA bav. bS;,a
to the proposed Cincinnati and Portsmouth
Railroad, is that itSwould induce country
merchants to 20 TO ciacinnati and lay in
their stocks Of Goods Groceries. g.. wben.
if no such facilities were afforded them they
would continue to buy here, Uoop the
same principle, why did not The gentlemen
who now make this objection oppose any
connection with railroads leading to New
York, Phiapelphia and Baltimore faye, and
why did they notoppose subscription Of
$4,000 which was made by the Scioto and
Hooking Valley Company to the Maysvilie
& B. 5. Railroad. that is destined to be a
link in road from Newport, opposite Gin
einnati, to this place, and which will afford
facilities for travelling to that city nearly as
q greatas the proposed road from this place
q thence ? Do oux citizens agree to expend
money to develops the resources Of and en-
nch kentucky while the same kind ofa.pro-
ject IN Ohio is frowned down? If the ar
gument be good that trade will be taken from
US and therefore the road ought not TO be
built, why YVES 1t not urged as an objection
10 The D. 5. Road? For it is evident that a
very considerable portion four trade might,
by means OF this road, be taken ffomus, and
we get in return for its loss-what? A rail-
road depot on the other side Of the river and
few dimes from travellers passing through
our place. But the consideration that we
should have railroad connection with the
cotton, sngar and tobacco plantations and
the Gulf Of Mexico on the south, was suffi,
cient to justify us in aiding in the construc
ton Of that road, and we were right in SC
. doing. II so, then why not let US have 4
rnilroad to Cincinnati, through our o,O,
State, and through portion of il which i
greatly in went OF railroad facilities9 II
we lose the trade ola few country merchant
will we not gain by the increase Of popula
ton; by the inducements which win thel
be held out to capitalists to establish manu-
facturies here and near here? With the ad
vantages of railroad connections east an
west, north and south-from the Atlantic t
g the Pacific and from the great Inland Seas t
- - III
80. 1890 - 80 ;.'s,.as. - W. "s .sa Ill. -,