Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-12-14

l BY Mr. SherrOd-A resolution to proven
the newspaper called the 'Sosdiers Ga
zette' from being deposited on desks o
members.
Thu resolution was called up, and OF
motion of Mr.. MeBath, was laid on tn,
table.
THE CINCINNATI SOUTHERN RAILROAD BILL
The unfinished business being the con.
sideration of the Cincinnati Southern Rail
road bill. it was taken up. The question
was on the adoption of a motion to lay on
the table the amendment of Mr.. Sinpletarv.
making uniform q reduced freight tariff
for all railroads in the State. The amend
ment was tabled
Mr.. McElwee moved to lay on the table
Mr. Rhea's amendment, providing for re-
| dueed tariff on the Cincinnati Southern
| Road. Carried-ayes As, noes II.
Mr.. White here called for the special
order, which was the House bill to relieve
the State Treasury, introduced by Speaker
Perkins.
Mr.. James. of Hamilton, hoped the
House would suspend the rules and 90 on
with the consideration of the bill now up
Discussion followed, Mr. Speaker Per
kins and others contending that the spe-
cial order was of vastly more importance
than the railroad bill, while MIR. James
and others argued that the railroad bill had
been put off so often already it was right TO
go on with its consideration.
Mr.. James motion to suspend the rules
was put and carried by over a two-thirds
vote-ayes4 40, noes 10.
On motion of Mr.. Speaker Perkins. the
bill to relieve the State Treasury was made
the special order after the Railroad bill was
disposed Of
Mr.. Kenney moved the previous ques-
ton on the passage of the railroad bill, but
withdrew it at the suggestion of Mr.. Flem-
ing.
Mr.. White in a few remarks opposed the
bill, claiming that it called for extraordina-
ry privileges and franchises which no State
should guaranty without first making pro-
vision for retaining some control over the
road.
Mr.. Neil argued against the passage of
tee bill. He was satisfied it would be fatal
to the prospects of our own local roads; 60
ing to build up the interests and CONNER
cial importance of Cincinnati at the ex-
pense of Tennessee.
Mr.. Russell, of Rutherford and Bedford,
proposed as an amendment an additional
section, which provides that the State of
Tennessee shall have five truseees of the
road, and who shall have equal power with
said trustees in the management of the
road within the limits of Tennessee.
Mr.. James, of Hamilton, opposed the
amendment, claiming that until Tennessee
furnished $4,000, 900, as Cincinnati had
done, it was preposterous to claim equal
control in the road. He moved to lay the
amendment on the table-carried; ayes,
Sc; noes, 81.
Mr.. Rhea offered an amendment provid-
ing that the Governor shall nominate as
trustees three persons living along the line
of the road, to be confirmed by the Senate,
who shall represent the interests of the
State and see that the rights of the road
are not infringed or violated
Mr.. White proposed an amendment that
the State Of Tednessee shall have the same
legislative control in this road that it holds
in other railroads of the State.
Before either Of these amendments were
acted on,
Mr.. Fleming, in a speech of considerable
length, opposed the passage of the bill
He vindicated the report of the Judi
ciary Committee against the bill, as sub
mitted by him on a previous day of the
session. He insisted that, notwithstand-
ing the amendments that had been offered
by the faiends of the measure, the bill in
ali its essential features, was still the same
as when it came from the hands of
the committee and subject to the
same objections He argued at
length to show that the con-
stitution of the State of Tennessee does
not authorize the passage of such bill,
which asks that foreign corporation, not
subject to our Legislature, should be in
vested with the sovereign right of eminent
domain for the good, not of Tennessee, but
of the city of Cincinnati, whose primary
and sole object was the ACKNOWLEDGMENT Of
her own wealth and importance at the gen
eral internal improvement system
of Tennessee. He argued that under
the terms of the Ferguson BILL" which
is but an evasion of the Constitution of
Ohio, and under the provisions of this
bill, neither Kentucky nor Tennessee
could share in the benefits of the enter
prise, but, if carried out, must submit to
an extensive and oppressive monopoly,
and that, too, without one cent of
tribute in return. He insisted that
the clause which exempted the
property of Cincinnati in Tennessee
from taxation is in violation of the Con-
stitution, and that the Legislature has no
power to enact it.
Ii the Legislature had the power to pass
the bill, for various considerations of pub
lie policy, he commended such extraordinary
privileges should not now be granted He
argued that mOnOpolies at best, and when
regulated by our own laws, are dangerous
to the rights and prosperity of people,
more especially so when in control of
power foreign to the STATE and competing
with the interests of the State. The
provision that suits might be brought
in our courts by service of process upon
any agent of the city or trustees, was only
a concession calculated to deceive. So
long as the entire road with all ifs append
ages and property of every description is
mortgaged Gb iHitiD to the Cincinnati bond
holder, any recovery in our courts would be
worthless, even could we get jurisdiction of
the trustees by such process. Under the
act of Congress, they might, as n foreign
corporation, transfer any matter IN con-
trOycrsy to the Federal Court, and any
satisfaction of any judgment when OBJ
tanned could only he had off the city of
Cincinnati. Being the absolute owner
of the entire line through Tennessee and
Kentucky. Cincinnati could afford to
pass all freight between Chattanooga and
Cincinnati, to and fro, at the mere cost of
running the road, or even less, thereby Sc
curing monopoly of the trade and the pros
tratiOn of all competing lines. Instead of
thus contributing To the ''pUbliC good
of Tennessee, she would be enabled to
crush out every effort toward the cree
ton of manufactures and to paTalyzC
the energies of the State in the future
development and realization of her
own wealth. Instead of being our
''henelaCtOr,, as has been claimed, Gin
cinnati is seeking to turn our temper
airy poverty TO her own CmOlumCnt,
and, having already enriched herself off
our misfOrtunCs, is now asking us in
our supposed extremity to surrender to
her, without compensation, our hopes
for the future. Our own railroad sys-
TEN has cost more than 500, 600, 900, and
our railroads are the only security we
have for the greater portion of our public
| debt. While the Legislature is now en-
gagged in doyising plans to render these
roads most profitable in the retirement or
payment of this debt, we are asked TO
strike a blow at the entire system, which
will instantly impair the value of every
important road in the State. Cincinnati
has persistently refused to make connec-
ton with any Tennessee road, because she
| desired the absolute control and benefit of
the project for herself
He denied that he had ever asserted the
Constitutionality of such a bill as this,
either as editor of the Press and Herald
or in any other capacity. He had urged
upon Cincinnati the policy of meeting
| Tennessee at the terminus of the Knoxville
and Kentucky road, for that would have
vltalizeda line of road tina is now languish,
| inC in its infancy for the reason that CiDcin.