Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1868-11-25

90 II mantullyi ana not by amendments nc
said If thcro were any evils complained Of by the
people on the line Of tic Bennington 6 Rutland
road, he hoped the Legislature would grant the
necessary relief, and give them what they want
and not what some one not Interested IN those
grievances might see ft to propose.
lie then referred to the course pursued by the
Rensselaer, & Saratoga road, IN ncglecting to
make the reports to the railroad commissioner
required by law, when that road was paying an
annual dividend to It's stockholders Of 10 per-
cent, aud II the managers Of the road should
make reports as other roads are required 10, it
would result in the receipt by The state OF large
revenue from the taxation VI the stock Of That
road. lie said that road would not make the re-
ports required by the laws Of this State, until the
penalty flr such neglect was made SO great as
that they dared not refuse longer To comply with
the law. He then submitted the case to the
House, and hoped vote would be lAd before
adjournment
Mr. Bartlett Of Lyndon, moved the previous
question which was seconded by the House and
the main question was then puthciug on che aJop-
lion Of the Substitute proposed by ,he gentleman
from Wcathorsfcd
Mr. trishic Of Poultney, demanded the yens
and nays, and they were taken, yeas ~. nays l7l.
So the House refused TO adopt the substitute
bill proposed by Mr.. Pingry of Wcathcrsaeld.
Mr.. Proctor Of Rutland, proposed an amend-
ment by adding new section as follows
I. The bennington & Rutland Railroad Company
4haii not charge or receive for freight ON marble
in blocks Or sawed, 10 carloads of ten tons or
more from West Rutland to Confer Rutland or
Rutland Village, whether hauled by them over
the Rutland & Washington railroad or over the
extension OF said Bennington & Rutland railroad
more than fifty cents per ton
Mr.. Park OF Bennington, said that the propose
ed amendment had been submitted 10 him. and
while he believed that the rate could be made
lower and still pay profit, yet he would accept
the amendment as proposed by the gentleman
from Rutland.
Mr.. Ahel of West Haven, said that the amend
ment proposed by Mr.. Proctor made an unjust
discrimination against the Rutland & Washing
ton road, inasmueh as the amendments reported
from the committee practically restrict the Rut-
land & Washington road to 20 cents per ton for
carving marble. while Mr. Proctor's amendment
allows the Bennington Rutland road b charge
30 cents per ton. Unless the freight charges of
the several roads were to be equalzed, the pre-
sent measure would operate injurously to ali the
important interests concerned, excepting the rail-
road corporation that was to receive the benefit
of such discrimination in its favor
There was considerable confusion in the House
while Mr.. Abel was speaking, evidently arising
from a desire ON the part OF the members 10 pro-
ceed with the vote rather than listen to any fur
ther remarks, and the remarks Of Mr. Abell were
very indistinctly understood by the reporter
Mr. Wood Of Fairhnven called the attention of
the House to some of the provisions of the amend
ments proposed by the committee, and was pro-
ceeding to point out some of what he termed the
inconsistencies of the bill, and tn comment on
them as being Unprecedented and unusual, when
Mr. Miner Of Manchester raised the point Of or
der that the discussion of the provisions Of the bill
was not in order when the question was only on
the adoption of the amendment proposed bv Mr.
Proctor.
The Speaker sustained the point of order az,
made by Mr. Miner
The amendment proposed by Mr.. Proctor was
then adopted.
MIR Miner of Manchester demanded the pre-
yious question. and the demand was seconded by
the House and the main question was then nut.
which was ON the adoption Of the amendment.
proposed by the committee on railroads.
MIR. Wood of Fairhaven demanded the yeas and
NAYS. and they were takep-ayes I4S. naVs 60.
So the amendments proposed by the committee
were agreed to.
The question then being on ordering the bill.
as amended, to a third reading
Mr. Park of Remington moved the previous
question.
Mr.. Wood Of Fairhayeu moved that the House
do now adjourn disagreed 10. ayes 81, nays l2l
The House then seconded the demand for the
previous question, and the main question wa.
put. Shall the bill he ordered to I've read tn,
third time?"
Mr. W Op1 Ot fulrltNtil uculllitl tilt Yeas dllN
NAYS which were taken. and were as follows
YEAs.-Messrs. Aldrich. Andrew. Appleton
Atwood, Baldwin, Ballou, Barnes, Bartlett o
Arlington, Bartlett of jay, Bartlett of Lyndon
/ Batcheller Beatse, Bemis Biselow Of Ryegate
/ Boyce. Brewer. Brigham Of Hydepark. Brigham
/ ofPittsfeld. Brookins Brown Of Belyidere, Brown
of franklin, Bucklin, Bushnell Catlin, Cobb
I Colby, Coleman, Cowles, Crane. Cristy, Darling
| Davis of East Montpelier, Davis of Troy, Deming
/ Divoll. Dow. Downing, Drake, Dunn, Eddy, Is
tey, Fish, Fisher Of Stannard, Fisher of Westmin
ster, Fisk, Fletcher. Foster Of Whiting, Foster o
| Wolcott, Freeman, Fuller, Gay, Glib, Gleed
Goff, Goodrich, Gordon, Grout Hale Hall o
Groton, Hall OF St. Johnsbury, Harris, liaskins
Hedden, Hewitt, Hibbard, Hill Of Middlebury
Hinckley. Holden Holman, llolton, Hoskisin
Hoyt. Hunt, Huntington, lluntoon, Hyde, In
gals, Irish, lsham of St. George, Jackson of Or
ange, Jewett johnson of Sherburne, Jones o
Cornwall, Keeler, King, Kinney, knsley, Know
ton. IAngdon of Montpelier, langdon of Ne'
Haven. Long, Lynde of Marlboro, Lynde OF vii
Jamestown, Martin, Mason. Mead, Merrill d
Bloomfield. Miles. Miner, Moore of landgroyc
Morse of Calais, Niles, Ober, Parker Of Moretowr
Parker of Sharon, Perkins Plympton, Pollard
} Proctor, Purmort, Reed of Barre, Remington
} Reynolds, Rice, Ripley, Rixiord, Robbins, Rol
; inson. Rogers, Ross, Royce, RUSSELL Ryan, saln
? Aeton, Silsly, Slayton, smith OF Stowe, Smith {
/ far1 StnnlRg &fptSln S\kQ,