Wilmington daily commercial., 1873-04-21

/ with the Lehigh coal fields. Outside OF the gen
| eral interest, there are local reasons why this
| bill should pass. The people Of upper Lehigl
have for years been struggling to get a railroad.
Some years ago they obtained charter to build
road from Slatington to Hamburg. /
| The road was not built, aud they came here
this year asking for an extension Of their time.
The bill passed this body aud was defeated in
the House-stTangled in Committee. l am told,
as was suggested by the Reading Railroad inter
est. have nothing to say against the Reading
ltailroad, and it may be perfectly exeusable that
they like other corporations and individuals are
Influenced by selfish motives. ! suppose thsy
want to prevent rivalry wherever they can. The
people of that section of the country were bad
ly treated by the refusal to pass that bill. This
furnishes them partial relief and gives them
the privilege of building road take It that
we have arrived at that stage in legislation in
this Commonwealth when it is the duty Of the
legislature, either by general law special
privilege, to give any community that desires it,
the privilege OF building railroad, and it is an
entirely selfish objection on the part OF the
Reading Railroad, and ono which should not
have any weight at ALL
Mr.. Davis (Philadephia). l understand there
Is a street in the city of Reading sixty feet wide
and that the Reading Railroad Company has
right under acts of the City Councils to use that
street to the width OF sixty feet.
Mr.. Davis Clerks } There was no such action
of Councils ever taken.
Mr. Davis (Philadelphal. One party argued
before the committee that the franchise Of the
West Reading Railroad COMPANY did not secure
them the entire street. The other party argued
that they were entitled to the whole street
that in no place WAS it wider than the space al
lowed them by the Councils OF Reading. The
question was then pending in the courts. think
the West Heading company would receive Justice
from Berks county court.
Mr.. Davis (Berks). 1 think the Senator will
understand this question after awhile. He lie
very much mistaken in his recollections of what
occurred in the argument. he counsel OF the
Reading road claimed that because the charter of
the West Reading company authorized them to
occupy land for the construction OF that road to
the extent of sixty feet that therefore when
the Councils of heading gave them authority to
lay track upon Canal street, they gave them
the whole street.
MIR Davis PHILADELPHIA That is what in
tended to say
Mr.. Davis (Berks). The counsel of the Read
ing Railroad Company did not seriously
press that point. 1 should not think he
would, either before court or any body Of IT,
teligent men.
Mr. Davis (Philadelphia) ask the Senator
il that was not the p0ilt made before the COM
mittee-that that was the question now pending
before the eourGs-whether the Reading Rail
road Company was entitled to the sixty feet or
not
Mr.. Davis (Berks). No. sir it was not stated
that that was the point raised in the court. Tho
injunction applies only to the track they were
about laying when they were nterfered with.
On the question, Shall the bill pass!
The yeas and nays were required by Mr.. Ran
dali and Mr.. Warfel. and were as follows, viz:
Yeas-Messis. Albright, Collins Crawford,
Davis (Berks), Delamaier, Dill Fitch, Graham,
HemRiI Humphreys Knight NJ Kinley, Usher
ry, Petrikin, Playford Rowland Strang Waddoll
Weakly aud Whte-20
Nays-Messrs Davis (Phiadelphia). Nagle,
Randall and Warfel-4.
So the question was determined in the aiiirma-
tive.