Orleans independent standard. [volume] (Irasburgh, Vt.) 1856-1871, 1867-11-15
assent of the towns he also thought
very objectionable and had always OBJ

VOAJ OVJOOeiOuooiO 1uA uOSA ~ F" - n
posed that provision in all bills of
this kind. There would be corrup-
ton under it and the only true course
was to have the matter fully discuss
ed in open town meeting. He was
opposed to the bill both in detail and
principal.
Mr.. Allen of Irasburgh, said it is
claimed that we must pass this bill be-
cause the towns through which it
passes ask for it. He thought that
argument amounted to just nothing.
The raising money to build railroads
was entirely different from the case
where money was raised for public
uses, for railroads as private corpora
tions, and the raising money for them
would involve the same principle as
though towns were asking to build
factory or mill in their midst. He
thought every man should be allowed
to do what he liked with his own. 1t
is true he had property in Lamoille
valley and he opposed the bill for that
reason but he also opposed it on
principle and believed it wrong to
allow towns to tax themselves for
such purposes.
Mr.. Ferrin of Montpelier said that
the arguments that had been raised
against the bill had but confirmed him
in the opinion that it was not only
right, but that it was the best method
of accomplishing the object. He CO.
incided with the views advanced by
the gentleman FROM Woodstock and
thought they covered the whole ground.
None but the people of the towns
named could know what they wanted,
and it was not for the gentleman from
Chester, or the gentleman from lras-
burgh, to say that unanimous re-
quest of these populous and wealthy
towns shall not be granted. He re-
ferred to the fact that the request of
the towns in Bennington county had
been granted unanimously, the gentle
man from Chester, a member of the
Legislature then, raising no objections.
Had he received any new light on the
, subject that would deny to the. people
of Lamoille valley what had been
! unanimously granted to the people of
, Bennington county? The people of
Lamoille valley are as capable of TAX
ing care of their own as the people
, of any other part of the State, and
they ought to be allowed to do So
He thought we were not prepared to
defeat this bill, and then read up the
. record of your acts as legislators of
this State. If it was just to grant
o enabling acts to towns to build Other
! roads, it is now as just to grant the
O same privilege to the towns in La
q noble valley.
!. Mr.. Jones of Cornwall, said tina
there are other interests in the Stat,
=, besides railroads, and it was as mucl
~ benefit to have manufacturers spring
> ing up in our midst as to have rail
: roads, and he could not overcome tn,
4 objection in his mind to allowing on,
: private corporation privileges no
. conceded to others. If any one coul'
give him any light that would enabl
y him to overcome such objections, pei
= haps he might be induced to favo
~ such legislation, but with his presen
! Information on the subject he was OF
" posed to the passage OF the bill.
e Mr.. Christie Of Johnson was in fay
or of allowing the gentleman froI
. Cornwall all the privileges that a lii;
~ jority of his town would ask, aud i
! they wished to aid private corpor;
=, :. tions, whenever he would show thu
- his town, or majority of it, was
y. favor of such an enterprise, the pc
q a. Pile of Lamoille valley would grant
y; ~ to them willingly, and he hoped tt
!" gentleman from Cornwall would graz
y, the same privilege 70 the people
- the Lamollle valley.
y: ~ Mr.. Brigham of Hydepark said
=. - the gentleman from Cornwall won
10 ' look at the question fairly, he Won
:. find his objections answered veI
~ readily. This railroad was just VIII
, u the people of LamoilIe valley want,
-. to develop manufacturing resourc
' which are abundant in every town.
~ "' 1t is only on the lines of railroa
- that manufactures spring up, and t
IT, railroad is the first step towards the
~ He answered at length the vario
- objections raised to the bill, repei
NJ ing substantially the arguments hel
~ tofore made in its favor. The peoE
W. of that valley both needed and des
; nv ed a railroad, and it cannot be bu
,n,, without the passage oi this bill.
~ hoped that the legislature would L
~ refuse the petition that had been st
b;s up to them, but would pass this b
I ms Mr.. Wood of Fairhaven moved
m recommit the bill to select CO
Ia Ia mittee of five with instructions to
49, port whether any amendments q
~ necessary to limit the amount of su
tbn subscriptions, or the manner or I
w., 0 time irbyhich they are to be ma,
=, -, :; HaIeppRsed the bill and sustained
. - m0tkQHs sa5 90 noIg.,
,,aa uoAkaIRr ighamafaised the point
- afder tbaEtJe aAotiea acouldl not
hill eatert& i4sdf Arthedrulesbkuts
ion Speakenentertssned tho isntioHdt I
aou Mr.. Rossoaf StsAobhs bs&y 4iq6sf
p"s ed against dilatofBimokjo aslg,
= . to kill the bill. d f,ne abnsll j
o - The Speaker on reflection cham
~ his decision and excluded the mot
60 90 to commit,
'no Mr.. Mead of Randolph moved t
W y. the bill be laid on the table and ms
In the special order for 2 IL o'clo
n m Tomorrow DisaUraad tn