Litchfield enquirer., 1873-04-03
THE RAILROAD COMMITTEE.

by Mir. Goodwin. We have read that statement carefully in connection with Mir. Goodwin's letter, published in the Enquirer of Feb. 27, and not only find no refutation, but on the contrary a confession of some of the important alle- gations of that letter and denial of none. In order to present the question fairly be- fore our readers we give the following re- su1se of the facts
 Finding that some of the companies had failed to make the full reports requir- cd by law, Mir. Goodwin introduced two resolutions early in the session, requiring the railroad commissioners to explain why they had not compelled those companies to make legal returns. These resolutions were referred to the railroad committee, who took no action thereon. Therefore resolution was offered which passed the House on May 9th, and the Senate on the 2sth of May. It was similar in sub- stance to the later one to be found in the committees letter, enquiring what action the Railroad Commissioners had taken to compel the companies to make returns according to law, and required report on or before the 5th of June. The commit tee admit the passage of this resolution as claimed by Mir. Goodwin Of it's loss they say,
 The resolution did not reach the committee | %0 secretary office, where it was afterwards found, | instead of to. the committee.
 Mr. Goodwin says in his letter:
 Meanwhile the commissioners saw, in the pa. l pers, the action of the Senate, and voluntarily came before the railroad committee on the after noon of. May 18th. The committee did not then have the resolution, and could not find the clerk I to get it from him; but Mir. Hall asked me to furnish a copy of it, it possible and if not, the 1 substance of the resolution. This I did, and 1 there and then on the afternoon of May 2Sth, I believe, (possibly the 29th or 3Oth) the commit | tee heard Mr. Gallup in behalf of the commis | sioners, and heard me in reply and the commit l tee was as well prepared to make it's report the next day. as it was on the last week of the ses- | sion after the Senate had, on July g, passed 8 l resolution directing the committee to report.
 The committee do not deny this state ment. They say: ~..
 It was ascertained at once that this resolution | had not been received by the committee and l could not be found, and MT. Goodwin immediate ly had notice of the fact: whereupon another res- f olution of the same import in the hand writing of Mr. Goodwin, was, on the 9th day of June, 1872, introduced in the senate by Mir. Wadsworth. The resolution of the 9th of June was introduced when the committee excused their inaction on the ground of the loss of the resolution passed May 18th. It re- quired report from them on or before July 10th. It will be observed that the committee do not deny that Mir. Good win had already given them copy of the resolution passed May 2s, and that they had all the facts necessary for a report. They toek advantage of the loss of that resolution, however, and of the delays which mysteriously impeded the passage of the resolution of June 5, to avoid any such report as the legislature had, on the 18th of May, directed them to make. In their statement this neglect is rather in- geniously lodged as follows: These endorsements show that this resolution which started in the senate May 24, on it's way to | the committee, was kept before the two houses till July Sd, when they finally agreed to it's pas sage.
 Now it will be seen by reference to the former part of the statement that the resolution of May 24 was passed on the 2Sth, and lost. It was its successor l'that was delayed in the Houses, till July 8. Nor did the committee report OH the 10th of July, as required, but on the t,centy-sirth. only few days before the final adjournment. Now let us see what the facts were, that it took the railroad committee two months to report, after be- ing directed so to do by resolution pass ing both Houses :,ss-.E = t".
 The committee do not find that said commis. sioners have taken any action to compel the raj road companies to comply with the law con earning annual returns, or reported the neglect of any company so to do to the state treasurer that said commissioners account for the neglect of the companies to make such returns to mis
 understanding of the present law upon the sub ject on the part of the companies. On this ac- l count they have neglected to report to the state | treasurer the delinquences aforesaid. An exami nation of the commissioners rMaort will show what companies have neglected ro make returns I required by law.
 Is there anything in the above report that could not as we'll have been given the legislature two months before and yet, in spite of repeated spurring by repeated resolutions, six we believe in all, and 1T spite of the disreputable fact that the game of stealing resolutions was being repeatedly practised by somebody, the com
 mittce refused to offer so easily prepared report as the foregoing, till after i
 could no longer be of any use.
 We should not think of censuring { railroad committee for not subscribing te
 the views of Mir. Goodwin regarding rail. road legislation. He is man whose zea
 constantly outruns his judgment and who is destitue of the tact necessary te
 impress co-legislators favorably. Never
 do one thing-to work indefatigably fol discovery of the facts necessary to the full
 understanding of the great questions a
 issue between the railroads and the peo
 pie A railroad committee having thu
 true interest of the people at heart would
 have given him every assistance he need
 ed to enable him to arrive at these facts
 and would have then drawn their OWL
 conclusions. If, for instance, it is true
 as the committee finally reported on the
 18th of July, tn at the failure of certain
 railroad companies to report according to
 law was owing to 8 misunderstanding oi
 that law, that misunderstanding might
 have been corrected and the facts ascer tained long before the session closed had
 the comittee reported as they were requir
 cd to do on or before the 9th of June
 We undertake no opinion as to the i'm