Bedford inquirer. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1857-1884, 1866-04-06
ten. Ross ON the RAILROAD.

i IlaEatil7t teattslf} 4AAAtN n tl4f 1S3N+-
TO Tas EDIroRs or THE BEDFoHp INQuIRER.
/ Nessrs. Editors In your Issue ofthe 10th,
in an article on the Connellsville and South
ern Pa Rail Road, you attack myself and my
colleague in what think very nnoalled for
nanner; applying TO US epithets which am
not willing to have applied to meso literally
when I think I am doing right; as was the
case on the bill extending said Road, and
which shall continue te maintain. although
I may be stigmatized as not having ability
and decision enough 10 understand, and
carry ont a bill that 1850 plain that heyoung
est limb of the law could not fail to under
stand am quite surpgisea that you have not
learned that if SIX other companies, or six
times six, wanted Rail Road privileges not
approved of by the dominant Railroad power,
they could not get them. You. perhaps, have
not been in public life long enough to have
learned that this is not the first time the
Pennsylvania r. r. has had its wishes car
rie3 ont. aud allow me to say some Counties
have been much benefited By the devotion Of
their Representatives to its interests, which
Is thought to be well done, even at the pres
ant time. On the question Of suspicion as
10 the intention OF said Rail Road company.
| am aware that IN the Southern portion Of
Somerset county, q large majority of the citi-
zens noto only suspect, bat have believed from
the FIRST, that they don't now, and never did,
Intend 10 construct the Road, but only hold
the privilege granted TO them to obstruct or
hinder the completion ofthe pittsburgh and
ConnellsyiIle Road; but as to the opinions of
the Bedford and Fulton county citizens, so
far as have heard them, all lead the other
way, and gave me to believe they thought they
we're acting in good faith. Thinking it to
be my duty to promote the especial interest
Of Somerset county, mot however at the ex-
pense Of Bedford and Fulton which could
be bat done by having the law repeating the
charter Of the Pittsburg and Connellsville
r. r. repealed, ffn which opinion am back
ed up by several hundred petitioners. In con-
versations had with Senator Householder, my
colleague, and others, declared my intention
to vote for any measure the c. and Southern
Pa. or its friends, desired, as there was no
antagonism between the two Roads, but that
having both of them made, we could oblige
our constituents of each of the Counties: ex-
pecting Of course, the friends Of said Road to
point out any unwise legislation they might
ask SO that it might be opposed expecting
them to go for the restoration OF the Charter
to our Road, the p and c. as lis the only
Road we expect any thing from. On the Both
January, Col. Quay read bill in place, Civ
ing the c. and Southern Pa the right to ex-
tend their Road from Connelsyille to Pitts
burgh &c Reported l4th February and pass
ed IL. of R. on the 28th February, with no OBJ
jeetious by me acting in pursuance of my
former declarations, having no warning or
intimation that it was exceptional to your
folks or itsfriends, by the gentleman who first
drew your attention to the subject and whom
you, very kindly, represent endeavoring to
prepare to meet the issue. The issue was met
in the Senate, and Senator Householder and
others tried to amend only as to the time for
commencing the work, and completing the
Road with but very little success, until, ! am
informed, an outsider had the matter arrang-
ed, and shorter period fixed for the COM
meneement Of the work. Hoping this explain
alton will satisfy you, and others who may
have misunderstood my position, ] am con-
tent Yours.
VI pnCC