Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1874-04-04

|
aid, we ought to expressly prohibit it.
l could point out how this matter
is manipulated BY these railroad corpo-
rations, their employees, for instance,
moving along from town to town and
county to county and living there long
enough to get habitation merely to
enable themselves to vote to pledge
that county, to bind its inhabitants for
the future to be taxed to aid in the
building of those railroads, having no
personal interest in the welfare of the
county. But cannot stop to discuss
that proposition. Our own State has
put in its organic act lately, and made
it part of the constitution of the
State, that hereafter no town, county,
or city, or municipal corporation with
in that State, shall bind itself or its in
habitants to give such aid or pledge it's
credit. That provision is approved by
the people and was adopted by an over
whelming majority and we feel pride
in that portion of our constitution as
much as in any other portion of it.
1 hope therefore that this provision will
not be adopted.
Mr.. HosKINs. I now yield three
minutes to my colleague from New
York, Mr.. Potter.]
Mr.. POTTER, (of New York;. ac-
cept, for the purpose of this discussion,
the statements made on the floor of the
House to-day, as to the value of this
railway as measure of local improve
ment and it's entire freedom from spec
ial objection, but, Notwithstanding that,
1 beg the attention of the House to the
principle involved in this bill. The
Congress has provided, and I think most
wisely provided, in the organic act
organizing the Territory of Washing
ton, that there shall be no power in any
county, or municipal corporation, or
even in the territorial Legislature itself,
to authorize one part Of the inhabitants
to pledge the property of the other
part for any work of public improve
ment. Now it is proposed to repeal,
as far as this railway is concerned, that
wise provision. and to repeal it at time
when, as the gentleman from Illinois
has shown the House, all the States of
the Union which have pursued this
policy have found it dangerous, result.
ing in litigation and sometimes in re-
pudiation, until to-day, in the funda-
mental law of Pennsylvania, and think
in the fundamental law ofseveral of the
other States, an absolute prohibition is
put upon the Legislatures of those
States against comforting any such
powers as we are asked to confer now
on this far-off county in Washington
Territory, without knowledge of the
locality or the necessities of the case.
This is power against every princi-
pie of sound legislation. Itnever should
have been tolerated in any republican
government, and ought to be con-
demned right here and now by this
House.
The gentleman who has charge of
the bill has said that the inhabitants of
the locality only ask power to pledge
their own property to build a railroad
for themselves. Not at all. That pow
er they have now; but this bill, if it be-
comes a law, will confer upon two
thirds of the Inhabitants of that county
the power to pledge, not their own
property, but the property of the other
third for the purpose of this railway.
That is, it will enable two-thirds of the
inhabitants to pledge the property of
the other third for an improvement
that but this two-t thirds of the people
want.
Mr.. HosK1Ns. I yield five minutes to
the gentleman from Nebraska, (Mr.
Crounse,) } member of the Committee
on the Territories.
Mr.. CRoUNsE (of New York This bill
involves a principle upon which the
people of this country are divided, a
principle which has divided the courts
of this Union. may perhaps say that
while the sentiment heretofore has been
in favor of granting this kind of aid,
there may be revolution going on
which is working the other way. If SO,
that revolution is induced not because
the principle underlying this legislation
is wrong and pernicious, but because in
the practice of it abuses have grown
up which have been burdensome and
oppressive to the people who have been
legis.ated for. 1 apprehend that it is
only the abuse that needs to be guarded
against. The case which is presented
here is a case where without the inter-
position of this Congress, no aid OF a
public character can be given to this
enterprise, and it devolves upon us the
duty of considering calmly whether in
its provisions this bill is sufficiently
guarded in all particulars to make it q
proper one for the appreciation of this
Congress. I apprehend that this is a
bill of that character
Iknow that the Committee on the
Territories approached the considera
ton of this bill in the same spirit which
perhaps actuates many members here,
a spirit of hostility to any legislation of
this kind. The bill was considered
carefully, section by section, with refer
ence thereto, and every possible guard
that could be suggested has been in
corporated into this bill. come from