The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1870-03-09

4
| Roan6k" Rairoad Company........ 40, Gs9 %
road i so7;o2 oU
mae I!ai'road tcmpany.......... 27o, COO %
| subscription to Alexandria. L0ud0nn
| and Hampshire Railroad Company, l,0l7,2@ 90
| Subscription to NAVIGATION anu other . -
Loss Sg' BY SeIicn #iiiticrs K Co.. and
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal COM -.
punJ o9'' ooo w
90. .3,.os. -
Which, added to the amount above stated
as comp aratirely valuelcss, makes the enor-
nous sum of s3l, oil $3.50, or nearly the
amount of the old State debt.
While it is true that the rayages of the
war contributed largely to this great loss, it
is also true that the major part of it cannot
| be ascribed to that cause. The real cause
of much of this loss dates farther back than
the war, and may be found in the untortu-
nate internal improvement policy which
obtained in this State prior to that date. l
say unfortunate policy because 1t has re-
suited in immense loss to the State. and
because it is manifestly and radically
| wrong. l am not opposed to, but rather
an advocate Of, governmental all to
public improvements. 1t is to the manner
| in Which, not to the fact that aid has been
extended to railroad and other improve
| ment companies, that l object. IN scam
ming over the list Of assets held by the
State above set forth it will he at once OBJ
served that in every instance Of original
| loans secured BY mortgage, that asset 10 OF
| a higher market value than State bombs,
| while in every single instance, save one
Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac
Railroad Company the subscriptions to
the common, and even preferred. stock are
| not dividend and the market value
| of which are far below that OF State bonds.
Do not these facts point ont the evil, and at
the same time suggest how it might have
been avoided 1t was right for the State
TO aid with its credit the building OF public
roads, railways, and canals and it wis
also right that in Going 50 she should have
secured herself against loss. Manifcstiy
the true policy III all caseo of governmental
aid to public improvements SHOULD be by
direct loans to the companies, secured by q
| first lien upon the franchise and pro-
perty Of the companies, or by the qua
rantee of the fist mortgage bonds OF
the companies. Most OF the old public debt
of Virginia was contracted in aid Of public
| improvements, and if the policy here sug-
gested had been pursued, that debt would
never have reached It's present magnitude
and its weight, whatever proportions It
might have assumed, would scarcely be ieit
by our people. Instead Of the high rate OF
taxation which must now and Tor years To
come prevail, in order TO promptly NEE;
the interest upon the State debt, nearly all
of the interest would be paid by the public
Improvement companies Of the State. II
is no sufficient answer to this position t.
say that this policy would have prevented
the building Of railways, roads, and canals
Grant that it would have checked the I'M
dertaking of some improvements. it must
be remembered that the greatest losses the
State has sustained huve been i'll lis sub
scriptious TO improvements that have been
either wholly abandoned, or are not and
never can become self-sustalnlng. 1t i
doubtful if there is any public improve
ment in the State required, or which ought
to have been built, which could and would
not have been completed under the policy
above suggested.
But the State debt is not in my judg
ment, the only evil resulting from the
policy heretofore pursued in this State il
regard to public improvements. There i;
but ono improvement III the State wholly
owned by her-yiz: the Blue Ridge rail.
road In all the others in which she Is IN
tere6ted she is either partner or co-stock
holder with private persons; and part
ner, too, on unequal terms. In some OF GU
railway companies the State is the owner o
u majority of the stock, and Yet she can
not, under existing laws, control any o
them. She has not an equal representa-
ton nor equal voice with the private stock
holders, in proportion to her interest, il
any of them. In other words, the majority
by the terms of the law itself, is suhordi
mated to the minority. In politics l hav
always yielded my assent to the genera
principle that the maj ority should rule, AM
can see no reason why the same principle
should not obtain in stock companies. /
the State is to be co-partner in bushes
with any of her citizens, then let her be q co
equal partner. If she owns q majority Of TIT
stock, then, if she chooses, let her contro
the company. But I am not only opposed
to this unequal partnership, but AIN nls
opposed 10 any co-partnership whateve'
in matters of business between the govern
ment and private persons. 1t has rarel,
proved successful to either party, and sue
cess is the criterian by which the world ii
accustomed to test the merits of business a.
well as of men. The highest railway steel
in Virginia to-day is of that company il
which the State holds the least, while til
lowest is that one in which she holds tn
largest proportional amount Of stock. If i
is urged that the State ought not to own au'
control the internal Improvement companie
because Of the danger that they may b,
used by the dominant party for politiea
purposes, it may be successfully answered
that the same objection, even in a create
degree, exists as to subordinate interest
In the former instance, the State authori
ties would be directly and wholly response
bic for the management, while in the latter
that responsibility would be diyidet
between them and the private stock
holders, and q division of responsible,
and of oounsels does mot tent
to promote efficiency or honesty. II it b.
urged that there would be danger of tues
great corporations, exclusively CONTROLLED
| by private persons, becoming vast ant
powerful monopolies, it may be answered
that the same danger exists whore, as here