The Cincinnati daily star. [volume] ([Cincinnati, Ohio]) 1875-1880, 1876-01-22
Communicated
90, ,OOO, 600 LOAN BILE.


our very serious attention. 1t should
be examined carefully, without favor to
any one and without delusion or pas
sion. The question is not one OF consti-
tutional limitation, but of power under
the act Of May 4, 1863, of Ohio. What
does that act authorize, and have these
Trustees obeyed it.? IT that act author
ICES them to go into Kentucky and Ten
nessee, and obtain from those States
power to construct this railway by cor.
porations created by those States upon
their own terms and under their control
with the fund provided, by that act, and
donations contemplated by the act to be
supplemented by an additional fund to
be furnished by the city OF Cincinnati,
then, undoubtedly the fund must be
raised and these Trustees supported.
But il the act OF May A, 1869, authorizes
nothing of the kind, and these Trustees
have assumed powers not delegated to
them, and have accepted powers from
those States not authorized by your
laws, and have Of their own accord is
sued bonds in the name of Cincinn att
without any legal sanction, then it is
their business and not yours. Cincin-
natl has nothing to do with them, their
road and their bonds. 1t therefore be-
comes us to look into our law and see
what it authorized, and then look into
these Kentucky and Tennessee laws and
see what they authorize. l urge this
upon you, upon your City Council, upon
your General Assembly, and upon your
people.
Mr.. Editor, before we sanction this
loan, let us stop and examine our act or
May 4, 1869, and see what it authorizes.
1. 1t authorizes the city of Cincinnati,
through her Council, to declare, by reso-
luton, that line of ra,laoayto be named
therein, essential to the interests of
the city, but provided:
2. That the line of TGiI,ody so specified
In the resolution be submitted to a vote
of the electors Tor approval.
3. Ii approved, Board OF Trustees
shall disappointed with hpower to raise ten
millions Of dollars by the sale of bonds
in the name of the city.
4. That with that sum and
donations they shall obtain the
right Of way and construct the said
railway So specified in said resolution,
in the name OF the city and for her benz
etit.
5. When the railway is constructed it
shall be mortgaged by the city to secure
6. The Trustees shah lease the railway
thus completed under the direction of
the City Council, and their powers and
trusts cease. l pray the General AS
sembly and the good people to examine
this act and see what are its provisions,
and whether or mol am not correct in its
expositions. If am, then the question
comes up: Does this law authorize the
city Of Cincinnati through her agents,
these Trustees, to issue bonds to build a
railway as her Council may designate TOR
her benefit beyond the amount authorized
by this act?
The act Of May A, 1869, provides the
fund for the construction OF the railway
it authorizes and no agent of the city
had power to locate or attempt to con-
struct, within OF without the State, such
line Of railway that could not be built
under the act OF May 4, 1869, with the
means provided to build it. If, then,
these agents have violated their trusts,
transcribed the powers given to them,
and done whaD they were not authorized
to do, why should their conduct be ap-
proved and further power be given to
them and more money, not to do what
they were authorized to do, but iof
doing, what they were not authorized
to DOE .
Now, Mr.. Editor, you can but see that
| this act of May 4, 1869, provides the fund
with which the railway it authorized
was to be constructed, and 1t contem-
plated no other fund, and the voters of
The city approved no other line of rail-
way than that, that could be constructed
with the 1und provided, and could be
constructed within the State or without
the State under that act. 1t then be-
comes necessary to look into the con-
duct Of these Trustees and see what they
have been doing. Have theY issued
bonds and used the proceeds 70 puild the
line Of railway authorized by the act Of
sary to look into these Kentucky
and Tennessee acts. Do these
acts authorize Cincinnati, through
the agency of these Trustees, to
/ construct this railway for Cincinnati
under the act of May A, 1869? answer
they do not. viii you look into them
Viii the General Assembly look into
them and see whether they conform to
the Ohio act lof May 4, 1863, or are gross
departures from it? II the latter, surely
this railway is not the railway OF Gin
cinnati, nor the bonds issued by these
Trustees her bonds.
Mr.. Editor, you assume and the other
Ijournals oil the city assume these Trus-
| tees have been faithful to their trusts,
that they have been acting in all re-
spects under the act OF May 4, 1868, while
the truth is they have wholly disregard
led it. fit be true the City Council des.
Iignated line OF railway to be construct.
cd that would cost more, than the fund
4 provided for its construction, then these
Trustees, as faithful men, should not
Ihave constructed 1t or attempted to con
struct it, until further provision was
made to enable them to do the work as
signed them; nor should they attempt to
construct d line OF railway located by
the City Council in other States unless
permitted by those States to construct
it for Cincinnati and in her name under
the act of May A., 1869. The cases -ol
Floyd's doceptances, Z Wallace, 666, and
Marsh 0s. Fulton County, 10 Wallace
i676. are SO clear ana 80 direct upon these
points, there is no escape from them.
commend, Mr.. Editor, these cases tx
your careful examination, as we'll as tt
The careful examination of the Genera
we are told, however, after these
Trustees, without authority, had OBJ
tanned of their own accord these Ken
lucky and Tennessee acts, the Wrigh
BILL. of April Is, 1873, 10 Ohio Laws, l39
confirmed; them, and fully authofizet
!. | thaca Trustpaa to act under them. Tl1.