The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1875-04-21
FLOR the DisDatch.1

(For the DisDatch.1
The New Railroad Law. 81.
The legislative history of the act entitled
Gan act to amend and rtenact sections %,
"a. and 26 of chapter 81 of the Code of 1878,
in relation to common carrierS-approyed
March 81, 1S75,-is not credilabIe to its engi-
neers.
In the Senate, on the 10th day of January.
1915. there was Introduced bill mo. 1857
entitled "a bill to amend and reenact Sec
tons %, q, and rs of chapter GIL OF the Code
of 1873, IN RELATION TO COMMON CARRIERS "
and. on motion of the introducer, it was re-
terred to the Committee of Courts of Justice.
This bill was printed and laid upon the Ia
bles of members of both houses-for their
information This printed bill proposed to
amend the Code only by inserting the words,
"OTHER COMMON CARRIER" so as to subject
all common carriers 10 the same law, which
was applicable 10 railroad and canal compa-
MES alone, and its sole object was expressed
in its title.
On the 9th day ofFebruary, 1875, the Sen-
ate Committee OF Courts of Justice asked TO
be discharged frorl further consideration OF
The bill, and that The same be referred to the
Committee on Roads; which was accord
ingly done.
On the 18th day. February, 1915, (three
DAYS afterwards the Committee on Roads
reported the bill with an amendment, by
way of SUBSTITUTE; which was never
printed and laid upon the tables Of members
for their information, and which embraced
many objects which were not expressed in
its title; which is liz substance, and nearly in
words, the bill subsequently, passed, and
which bears to the original printed bill, upon
which it was grated, only the resent lance
of broad and ludlarous caricature. .,
Four days afterwards, ION the 18th day OF
February, 1879 inthe Senate, the bill No.
l25 was taken up, and the IMPRINTED sUBsTI-
TJTE agreed 10, and The bill as thus amended
ordered TO be epgrossed. ...-..-. .
And on the Sd day of March, 1870, the
eugrosse1 bill was read third time and
passed, and the clerk was ordered to inform
the House Of Delegates and request concur
renee. ...-. ...-..--
In the House of Delegates on the 4th day
of March, 1875, the bill No. 135, as it had
passed the Senate, was read twice and re-
ierred to the COMMITTEE OF Courts OF JUS
7ucE. The journal does not show whether
this particular reference was made BY special
order of the House, or by the Speaker, or
the clerk, mised by the title, 10 the ordinary
course OF business. At any rate, the bill
never did pass the ordeai Of the House Com
mittee on Roads and Internal Navigation.
On the Goth day of March, 1875, the Com
niuee on Roads, DC, reported the bill with
verbal amendment. which was simply this:
to strike cut the nonsensical words, "agent|.
local and through, such as it may designate"
and irsert in lieu thereof the more intelligi-
BILE words, "own local agents and such
agents or agencies as 1t may establish in any
city or elsewhere"
Amid the sush and gush Of the evening OF
the Goth day of March, 1S75,-hhe penulti-
mate night of the Session-the bih was taken
ND, the verbal amendment agreed TO, and the
bill was passed. and one Of the members
IVES dispatched forthwith to infora the SEN
ate and reqGest concurrence in the amend
mas,t of the Haase Of Delegates.
That same night Of Tuesday, MhEch 30,
1876. the Sen4<te agreed to the amendment
proposed by the house of Delegates, and the
bill &as passed.
How and under what pressure the bill was
enroiked that night the record showeth not.
But the Governor approved and signed it
with haste which &ould nave been indie
cent il he had ku0wc, or even suspected, the
imposition which ass being put upon hiaa.
Fortunately, the titie OF the aet-"an act
to amend and reenaet sections %, "a, and
&c of chapter 81, Code of 1873, IN RELATION
TO COMMON CARRIERS, (which doubtless
helped TO deceive and mislead the Governor,
extracts theAing from ibe wound which the
Governor uRTlttingly iGl1icted upon the
commerce Of Virginia. The Constitution
(article ", section 15) declares "No LAW
shall embrace more than 0ae Object, which
shah be expressed in its title" The act
under consideration is, therefore, emo law"
because 1t embraces many objects, and the
single object expressed in its title, g. in re-
spect To common carriers" Is interposed only
as a shield to hide other objects which lie be-
hind It. The whole act comes within the
ban of the Constitution, and is null and vold.
Therefore it is the duty of every "rail-
road, canal, steamboat, steamship, or trans
portation company, or other common car
rier, chartered by or doing business within
this State" to ignore conscientiously and
dutifully disregard all the provisions of this I
act, which is no law; to unite in efforts to |
disseminate among the people truthful in
in order that every member of the
General Assembly who desires reelection may
be brought 10 account before his constituents
or bis participation in this iniquity, and
hat the act may be repealed, and all the lob
oyists who participated in the job may be
brought to punishment. METROPOLIS.