The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1867-02-21
,Ieetin.- nt 1he CourI Mouse.

Meeting at the COurI House.
According to the announcement made
Yesterday morning debate came off
last night at the Court House, between
Ntessrs. woodman, of Parkersburg, and
stanton, of this city, on the merits of
the late railroad bill, or rather On the
merits of the principle involved in that |
bill, \ large number of citizens and a |
very fair representation of the two
houses of the legislature were present |
and listened with marked interest to all
that was said. Robert Crangle, Esq, |
presided as chairman OF the meeting. |
Before the regular order Of business
Mr.. +. NJ. Norton made some remarks
to the general effect that having gained
the point OF time as against the COM
Pany's original application, by cutting
it down from Il perpetuity to a tiYe years
lease, he thought the policy Of the State
should be conciliatory as to the amount
OF tax to be assessed.
Messrs. woodmnn and Stanton made
two speeches of thirty minutes each.
We shall not at this hour and in this
limited space, attempt even an outline
of their remarks for and against the
bill. The principal positions assumed
by the former gentleman were these:
that as matter of public policy rail
roads were to be fostered, even by ex-
emptions when necessary, in
order to build up and devel-
ope the wealth of the State; that
in our State such policy was peculiar
ly necessary; that in case "a different
policy was pursued, capital would not
invest in any such enterprises in our
midst, and that consequently we would
lose more in the way of taxable values
generally than we could hope to make
up specifically from any or all mere
railroad taxation; that there was an
acknowledged difficulty in the way of
getting at the Baltimore and Ohio Com
pany Tor purposes of taxation, and that
we had better compromise and avoid
tedious and expensive litigation.
These points Mr.. Woodman elabo-
rated at considerable length, and in
doing so he made SOME rather unfortu-
nate statements, as we thought, for his
side of the case, as for instance in citing
the fnct that the Camden and Amboy
Railroad of New Jersey, esteemed to be
II great monopoly and generally I'M
popular throughout the country, was
nevertheless the great benefactor OF
New Jersey, paying large share OF
her taxes and atlOrdiug cheap transpor-
tation to her citizens. The reference 10
this company was turned on his oPPo-
nent very pointedly by Mr.. Stanton
who eOntrasted its position as being the
exact reverse of that of the Baltimore &
Ohio Co. The one paid an immense
tax, while the other sought, virtually
TO escape from any tax whatever. The
one charged its local trade less rates
than its through business, while the
contrary was true of the other.
An other unfortunate reference by
Mr.. WOodman was to the case of the
Central Ohio railroad, which he said
had been broken down by excessive
taxation in that State, but which
as Mr.. Stanton replied, had been re
Gently leased 10y the Baltimore and Ohio
Company, taxation and all, as n profit
able Investment, in connection will
their own road. IL was asserted tina
the Company would pay more tax
twice or three times over, on the Is
miles of the Central Ohio road, thar
they proposed to pay on their 343 mile:
OF road in this Stnte.
In noticing the argument OF Mr.
WoodmHu in regard to the difficulty o
ussessingtr tax upon the company, Mr.
Stanton said that the difficulty was sur.
mounted in other States, and he pre-.
summed it could be in West Virginia. A
law of 1858 provided that railroad Off
GERS should returnu valuation OF theil
property as II busis of taxation, which
Jaw the Baltimore company had neve
Vet complied with. They could not
therefore. plead the argument of tn,
gentleman in regUrd to difficulty. As
for their going over from this State Il
Bellair with any of their shops, hi
thought that would be getting out o
the frying pan into the fire. Such tall
wns all for effect.
Imposition occupied by Mr.. Stanton
throughout the discussion was tina
there was no reason in law, in right, o.
in public policy, why the Baltimor
and Ohio Company should not be deal
with as any other tax payer. 1t de
mnnded and received protection, 1t
property was valuable and remunera
tive, it had enjoyed long freedom
from taxation, IL was guaranteed sil
per cent. Of an exemption over anC
above all citizen tax payers, and
therefore, it WAS right, it was legal, anC
IL WINS common justice that it should bt
restrained in its present efforts to SO
cure extraordinary advantages at thu
expense of and to the detriment of tn
public interests. r