The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-03-03

other Railroad measures, was the order of the
day.
There have not been many bills brought before
our State Legislature, that have been urged with
more pertinactv, and with such fuctuating for
tunes as the BROCK Bill. All sorts of influences,
and all manner of diverse interests, have been
enlisted in its support, and in the complications
that have ensued it is possible that The true prin
cples which ought to govern the action of the
House of Delegates in this case may be lost sight
of altogether. In the Senate, the matter has
already been determined, hastily, unwisely, and
in manner certainly adverse to the wishes of a
large majority of our citizens-whose only hope
of relief now rests upon the enlightened frmness
of the Lower House. If BROCK and his associates
simply asked for the confirmation of a grant
which had been fairly and honestly obtained from
our City Council, their application would be enti
tied to all respect. But when almost every in
telligent man in this community is satisfied
that the charter was gotten by means the
most dsreputable and corrupt it becomes
the duty of the House ot Delegates, as the
only barrier now remaining TO the consummaton
of fragrant outrage upon the rights Of the people
of Baltimore, TO reflect seriously whether there
are not good and sufficient grounds for denying
peremptorily to Brock & Co. the possession of a
franchise, which is acknowledged to be of great
pecuniary value, and which few doubt was surrep-
ttiously obtained. 1t is at all times difficult to
get at positive proof in cases of this kind, even
where the suspicion amounts almost to a certainty
that men have been tempered with. But the very
circumstances under which the charter for City
Railway was forced through the Council; the SIREN
nous opposition which was made by certain MEM
bers of that body to the BRooKs-BARNUM Bill, with
its three cent fare; their ostentatous appointment
of Committee TO examine into the truth of the
charges brought against them, and the efforts
they subsequently, made to render the investga-
ton abortive--al these things go to prove that
there We're transactions connected with the grant
which wo.ld not bear exposure, and that the
rumors in regard to these transactions, which had
excited so much indignation in the community, were
well founded. The testimony taken at Annapolis
shows that Brock was the principal party TO the
proceedings under which the grant was conferred
upon TRAvERs and others; that through his agents
he expended large sums of money to promote the
object he had in view, and that he is by no means
who comes openly into the market and obtains
by purchase the transfer of a valuable privilege.
OF his completely there can be no more doubt than
that tie whole scheme was carried out upon
pre- arranged plan. The use of the names of
the original grantees was unquestionably for the
purpose of hood-winking the public Had it been
otherwise they would never have parted with the
franchise for the patry sum of five hundred dol
lars paid to each individual named in the grant;
for certainly no one will accuse either of the indi
vduals in question of willingness 10 make any
extraordinary pecuniary sacrifice of a thing which
they had taken much pains to secure, from a
sentiment of romantic friendship for a perfect
stranger That the interests of our citizens were
not consulted is evident enough, from the prompt
refusal of the Council to consider the BRooKsBAR-
NUN bill, and the conclusion is therefore irressti-
Bile that all the various parties TO the grant were
instruments in the hands of BROCK, and that they
have been or are to be, well paid for the work
they were deputed to perform. We know that
strenuous efforts have been made at Annapolis to
impress upon the Legislature the belief that the
contest is not between Brock & Co. and the people
of Baltimore; and that it, in reality, narrows itself
down to a mere struggle between rival spectators
for the possession Of n privilege which one Com
pany has obtained, and which the other covets.
Nothing can be remoter from the truth
The popular indignation that has been
excited in this matter is far more deeply
grounded. 1t arises from profound conviction
that the grant was procured by gross corruption,
and that those whose duty it was to protect the
interests Of the city were among the foremost to
l.,,. III e Tho Id loo,
made, and its provisions faithfully carried out,
however onerous it might have subsequently
proved, the intervention of the Legislature would
never have been sought. But the testimony taken
by the Committee at Annapolis indicates the I'M
scrupulous nature Of the agencies employed, and
the tricks and subterfuges that were resorted to
although the full extent TO which money EN-
ployed in procuring the charter will in all proba-
biity never be known. Brock was perfectly
aware that the men who had lent themselves to the
consummation of his project would not confess
their infdmy, and he was therefore easy enough
upon that point when he gave them permission to
do so. Yet the citizens of Baltimore are not the
less conscious of the wrong that has been done
them, and therefore it is that they resist the appi
cation of BROCK & Co. for act of incorporation,
and confidently look to the House of Delegates for
that relief from obnoxious monopoly which
they have unquestionably the right to claim.
To the reasons here reca piuated for refusing to
charter Mr. Blocks Company, another and
stronger must now be added. 1t has been de-
monstrated that sufficient capital be obtained
here to build and conduct a road on which only n
three-cent fare will be charged. The subscrip-
tons already received from responsible parties
would seem TO have settled all doubts on this dis
puted point. The Legislature may, therefore, de-
cline to consider if it chooses the frauds through
which the ordinance is alleged to have been pro-
cured, and refuse to grant charter to Mr.. BROCK,
simply upon the ground ethat his opponents offer
better terms. The difference between three and
a ive-cent fare is of considerable Importance to a
large proportion of our citizens, and if the Legs-
ature is satisfied that responsible Company is
willing to carry railway at the former rate,
it is difficult to conceive how it can avoid giving
it the preference over those who would tax our
people more heavily.