Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1871-11-30
Railroad Charters, Con-
solidations, etc.
The Constitutional Powers of the
Tennessee General Assembly
Over Corporations.

Over Corporations.
Below we print that portion OF
the speech of Hon James D. Till
man, of Lincoln, delivered to th
House of Representatives or tn
9Th instant, in which is discussed
the power of the Legislature over
corporations under the new Con
stitution
The bill before the House pre-
sents a very plain and simpl,
proposition. Its provisions ar,
not numerous or complicated. 1
simply provides for the consolida
tion of railroad companies by salt
and purchase-the PURCHASING
company to exercise such power
over the road as might, by virtue
of its charter, exercise over it
own road.
Authority is given the purchas
ing company to issue bonds Oh
make mortgages to procure mon
ey to equip, repair or extend the
roads purchased, and for the pur.
pose of making payments to the
State of unpaid purchase money.
The States interest is abun.
dainty protected in the proviso of
the third section, which declares
"that this act shall in no way i'm.
pair any hen, or mortgage or pri.
critics of lien that the State of
Tennessee has upon any of the
said railroads or upon the proper.
ty of the said companies"
The objections to the bill are
not numerous, and in my opinion
not well founded. If the Legisla.
ture can pass any law regulating
the powers of corporations, it can
certainly pass this one.
The provisions of the bill are
general; it proposes S to confer upon
all railroad companies, chartered
or hereafter to be chartered by
this State, the same powers and
privileges.
The generality and impartiality
of its provisions render the consti-
tutionality Of the proposed law I'M
questionable. It is in perfect ac-
cord with the spirit and meaning
of Sec. 8, Art II of the Constitu-
tion.
We are told that the benefits of
this act may be procured by decree
of the Chancery Court.
Here we are met with the oljec.
tion of the capitalist, who says i
cannot lend my money to a cor
poration whose powers depend ~
on the decree of a chancellor.
The company which now desires
to exercise the powers conferred
by the act says that it already has
a decree of Chancellor Scott, at
Memphis, conferring all the pow
ers proposed to be gwen in this
act.
Why, then, it is asked, are we
called upon to do what has already
been done? Are we to come here
and legislate at the bidding of
capitalists in Wall street or else
where? Certainly not; but if
we would authorize a deed to be
male or mortgage created, we
must do it under such forms of
law as will satisfy the purchaser
or mortgage.
This we are told has not been
done, and some of the best law
yers in the State do not believe a
Chancellor can, under existing
laws, Increase or diminish the
powers of corporations. The peo-
pie of Tennessee through their
delegates in convention made the
Legislature their agent to enact
general laws in relation to all cor
porations, and do not believe the
can delegate its au-
thority to a Chancellor. An a.
gent cannot create an agent. If
any discretionary power is given
the Chancellor, under the law
which makes him the creator of
corporations, to that extent is he
made a legislator and judge of
what is for the public good-to
that extent are the legislative and
judicial offices blended.
The powers conferred by the act
of 1900 on the Chancery Court,
might with as much reason have
been conferred on any member of
the House. Section 9 of article
IL of the Constitution furnishes
no reason why this power to grant
and amend charters was vested in
the Chancery Courts. Section g
of article IL was In the old Con.
stitution, while more than half of
section s in relation to the powers
of the Legislature on the subject