Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1858-09-10
10 me Ed,tcrs ofths Enquirer.
pHiLADELPHIA Sect 1883
Messrs. Editors: "a cept my best Thank Tor he

hlfesEe. EDltVrt.-ACEcpt U'st iHhtk- nav
;ngso promptly Published MP communication headed
lis Virgins repudiaing Statef' have read your
predatory editorial comments with the srict attention
the importance Of the subject demands, aud sincere
~ wish could now deem it proper 10 abstain from
AL ur er reference To tEis unpleasant topic, and point
10 the editorial columns of the enquirer as Afford
ing Il complete vlndcaiiOn OF ths good faith oil the
State OF Virginia when impugned 10y what might then
regard, as the querulOus cavliling and Complains
oi the bond and Stockholders z" The Richmond, Fr-h-
rcksburg and Potomac Rail Road Company, residing
in the city OF Philadelphia. trust you do not doubt
that il would be- my pride aud pleasure 10 concur
with you in opinion, il could couscenuou-ly do
and thus concurrng, TO set about the work-a some-
what difficult task from all appearances of dissbusing
the micds OF many substantial men here ot false I'M
pressioDs. Ii would indeed efford me- the greatest
pleasure 10 he able to safety them that thy hav
more reaaon nOr for doubling the good faith OF ny
native STATE, than they had when they subscribed,
years ago, large sums OF money TO construct The Rch.
mUnd, Fredericksburg and Potomac Rail Road Com
pany, on The pfpdge ut the General Assembly ron
taned in the 35Ih section Of the charter of the Com
pamy. But must frankly declare that, after fun
examination OF the Question circumstances will nd
NIT cannot agree with you. ] will, therefore. pro-
coed to present TO you and 10 the people ot Vrgna,
as briefly may b. my REASONS for differing from
your Conclusions as set forth III your remarks accom-
psnying my communication. And in the first place
permit me- TO call your attentiono the 'Sh section OF
burg and Potomac Rail Road Company. Ii reads
thus:
land, whereas, the rail road authorized by thi. act
will form q part Of the msin Northern and Southern
route between the city ot Richmond and tbs city n
Washington, and the privilege "f transporting us
-rugrrs the sane aud Receiving the passag- mo
ncy. will il ia believed, b. strong induc-neni ior
individuals TO subscrbs tor stock in the company
and the General Assembly conSdsr- il iust AMI res
able tina. thore who embark in the enterprise sa alb
not be hereafter deprived ct that which furms Ct:e
Undue m-nt 10 the undertaking:
"3S.h. b. II, therefore. enacted and declared, IN!
the General A>srdably p'dges itself to the said
pany, that, i'll The event OF ts completion at The anJ
rail road from the city Ut Richmond 10 the If
Fred-rick- burg. within tn. timr limited by ,hl. acl.
the General Assembly will no for the period OF thirty
years from the completion Of the said rail road allow
any other rail road 10 be constructed retween the
cify at Richmond and the city OF Washington. or Ior
any portion OF the said distance the probable elect Of
which would be- 10 diminish the number "i pa-sengrrs
travelling between the one city aud The other, upon
The rail road authorized by this act or To compel The
company in order 10 retain such pHsseugers, In re-
ducb the passage money: Provided. however, Thai
nothing herein Contained shall te no construed Gs ~
prevent the Legislature nj any lime hereafter, from
authorizing the construction of a rail road beiwr.a
the city of Richmond and the towns of Tappshann1ck
or Urbann or 10 any intermediate points between Ib'
raid city Of Richmond and the said towns: And
provided also. that nOthn. herein Contained shall be
construed 10 prevent The General Assembly from
charteriEg any other company or companies 10 con-
-ruct rail road from fredericksburg 10 the CITY o..
Washington
If | interpret your remarks correctly you sesm to
think that this SOLEMN pledge or guarantee Of the L.
gissture OF Virginia, Viz; That the General Assem-
hly will not, tor the period o. thirty years from The
completion of the said Richmond aud Frederick
burg Railroad, allow any other railroad Ia be
rlructed between the city Of Richmond and ths city
of Washington, or tor any portion OF the said dis
tance, the prO6aJls fHsa of which would be I" di-
minish the number Ui passengers travelling between
thu one city and The other upon the railroad au:b"r
i2sd by this act. TO compel the company, in order
10 retain such passengers to reduce fhs passage mo
ney," given To those who might be induced by such
pludge TO subscribe their monies 10 this enterprise
meant nothtig At The time the net WAS passed aud
mean aOhing now, md is therefore to be d-n ls-d
from our consideration as r0ntsmptuous nulllty.
But in thiI | must differ with you; in this am
others will differ with you, while there are many.
fear, whose affection and RESPECT for the State Of Nr-
ginia. being naturally much less than my own
should such Il construction at the terms of thiI
ton of tho Act OF Incorporation prevail As the fUun-
daiiun fo rule Of Judicial decision 10 The may
disposed to regard IN. procuring of loans under
-ucf Legislative publication ut sprcial advantages
10 tn. company, very nearly akin to the oilanrr
know tn the law Lt0i Of ObLaniHg mOae0Or goods
under taise pref mc's. by astrangn Misrepresentation
you appear tbInk too that the Courts OF The STATE
and the Supreme Court of the United STATES hive
privileges whatever of passenger travel under
the act of Assembly in which they find charter-ihat
The grave and potential authority ut the courts mny
be c,ted for the extraordinary npnion.iha the distinct
aud positive pledge contained III the 80 h -tc"n nj
the Act of Incorporation, meant noh'ng when en-
nrr,l but false ligh, held out 10 the unwary h-rc
10 Philadelphia and elsewhere to s-cur. subscriptions
10 great work OF Internal Improvement for ihe ben
III, at the State and means n0ihng now; To be trent
III only AZ idle words not likely 10 impose on ANY
and lkrf
,he truth that n-iher The Courts OF Virginia
;he Supreme Court OF the United States have said
any -uch thing, hut on the contrary have COMMITTED
Ih-n--iv-s against The possibility "i ever striving al
such prrposisrnu- Conclusion. by avm" SID. u.nr
.nadv ertence you appear To nave mi"r"nc-rr'i the
whole sub cc, both regards Ne history IN point at
fact ih- principles I" law which wrra decided hy
tho courts III tho hBard ana deciieL by them,
which cas, 20 hesrd and decided only bear- incident
ally on the issus before the Courts of the State.
rud To which hsve taken thu liberty to invite your
attention and that Of the pe0pls OF Virginia.
The history OF tbs Case shows III biiri, that the
Redmond and fredericksburg Rail Road Company
chartered by IN. State IN 1881. the charter
ta.u;ng, among other lhngr The provisions already
quoted. Ia the Year 1876, th. L1u'sa Ro1d WA in
corpnrated, and Two years afterwards il up"ned
from Louisa Court lIuu-e ~ the Junction Tsy
!orsvie. In the year 1913 The L. gisaIur- passed
act authorizing the Lousa Company 10 extend their
road from the Junction, 10 the Dock in The city
Richmond. snbjsct 10 certain cundons which. il Nc
copied and performed by the Richmond AMI Freis
rickshurg Road would have had the effect 10 desG.
the charter ;bus given. The Richmond Hnd FrrdI
rick shurg Road refused tn hccrGs Ia such condition.
and filed BIZ! in the Superior Court OF Cnancery
The Richmond circuit Z" RESTRAIN the LOUISA Rail R1hi
Company constructing. the line ui their road from
the Junction Ia the Dock IN tho city OF Richmond -
The bill prnys that the respondents may be enjoined:
lst. From entering upon any lands which may III
condemned for the Us" 1T the cOmpainans road, for
4 he a . n rail road il.
21d. That The respondents may be- enlonei from all
further proceedings t0wsrds the cODsruc:cn OF rnli
road between the Junction and the city OF Richmond.
3rd From transporting OH tho ra;l road proposed
TO be constructors, Pcrronu property and the mall aud
especially !r"n transporting passenger. travelling b
tween the city Of Richmond and tho city Of Washing
ton.
The State Court decided lst. "Thst the privilege
or monopoly guaranteed 10 cnmpainanis by tbs 3Sih
section OF their act OF Incorporation, Js TINT NJ trans
porting passengers bft,oen R,cGm1ad ant WasLir-'.
tan but that the Legislature by thst enactment Gld
part with the power 10 huihorise Tho construction
of rail road between Richmond ard Fredsrick burg
o'her purposes tina. they had therefore the right
au,horiss The extension Of hr ir-pOndeIis rosd ID.
Dock in The city of Richmond p"
2nd. That the grant ot franchise Ia one ronporv
Ia make II rail road, is not inIring-d by arihfri
sng smother rail road Ia IN laid acro's il end piy'n:
such damages As may accrue 10 the hrit IN c3n.e-
Quenc. thereof"
Bird That if the Louisa Company, (now the Vir-
gina Central -houll thereafter uss their road by
passengers in violation If the rights
Ia conplainanls by The 3Sh section, and
there should be adequa'. rrin-dy nj law, it might
be proper TO interfere by INJUNCTION 10 enorca surh
proceeding"
The conplHinan''s bill was dismissed on these
grounds. and ths decree in the having bspn
affirmed by The Court Of Appeals, the then
taken by the compliments 10 the Supreme Court of
the United States. The Supreu. Court OF thu United
- Rtss pcdrU lst That the atinnlatiOn tlin SS'1
section WAS TO be construed rlriciIy against the
curporation-2i, That it WAS not violated merely by
another Rail Road which might ba used
TO transport merchandise. Tn. opinion Of
four OF the judge himself included, being majority
OF the Court, WAS delivered by Judge Grier, whale
three Of the JUDGES, Curtis, Wayne and Mclean.
dissented Judge Daniel declining to sit in the case.
because OF being stockholm in tbs Richmond aud