The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1877-02-12
UNFINISHED BUSINESS.
The Canal SWinGle.

The lawyers in the House OF ID elegates
who seem to be carrying things their own
way, are so busy exposing the detects i'll the
bill which proposes to lease the canal with
the view to its completion that they have
not had time to exhibit any flaw in their
PETITE bill which proposes to sell the ca
nal in order to piece it out with railroad.
They estimate the cost OF this work at
800, 900. But in the presidents report for
1916 he gives the cost by estimate OF Messrs.
Whitcomb and Temple at s692,S3 or
about one third more. As their last esti-
mate exhausts their resources, it is hard to
tell what they will do if Mr.. Whitcomb
should prove to have been right, as he most
probably was.
But how do they estimate those resources!
According to Mr.. Dooley, in this wise: For
road-bed and bridges, bonds of the Buchan-
an and Clifton Forge railroad at ninety
cents for superstructure, the same bonds at
eighty-five cents; and for equipment, the
third mortgage bonds Of the James River
and Kanawha Company at sixty cents.
In view of the fact that first mortgage
bonds OF tue James River and Kanawha
Company are worth only "A, and that
second mortgage bonds, as reported by Mr.
Hubbard, have been hypothetical at 1s,
Mr.. Dooley's figures arc very remarka-
bic. But when members Of the Assembly,
anxious to understand them, ask for de-
tailed and itemized account Of the transac-
tor, the lawyers say it will be against the
interests Of the canal to let in daylight OH
such administration. Now, suppose it was
q private transaction, and that lawyer, re-
presenting lot of clients whose lands
were Threatened with sale under trust
deed for non-payment Of interest.
,lx boa ~ Of
creditors and other money-lenders to
buy his clients bonds at from two to five
times their market value, and abate all de-
nand for present payment Of interest, pro-
uidcd possession Of the land should be ac-
corded to them. Would he not think it his
duty to see the parties to so strange an offer
and to inspect the contract which contained
IT.? If aye, then why should members Of
the Asscmbly-the sworn attorneys for the
whole State-be rebuked by lawyers who
counsel them to do what not lawyer in the
House would do in the most insignificant
case he could have?
But suppose, further, that only a part OF
the creditors-but little more than balf-had
aSsented to such an arrangement, would
any lawyer advise his client to make this ar
rangement, especially when suit was
pending to force settlement on the part of
other creditors? Would he not know that
such an arrangement, like any other COM
promise with creditors, would require
unanimous assent to make it valid! Would
he not advise his clients to make no ar
rangenent which could be wiped out when
ever it suited the creditors who were not in
the ring? And yet lawyers in the House
of Delegates tell the House that the charter
Of a company which has no legal standing,
which has never been legally organized,
ought to be voted for without an eyamina-
ton Of details.
But they find fault with the lease. Very
well. IL it ought not to be granted don't
grant it. But why should the Legislature
be. deluded into voting for a bill whose
merits will not bear discussion because
there is another before them which has OBJ
iectionable features? Whatever may be
said OF the lease this is and must be true OF
the railroad scheme. It now stands con-
fessed that the James River and Kanawha
Company is chronic delinquent in payment
of interest. It's first mortgage bonds are
worth Al, its second not more than %, and
it proposes to build road by selling third
mortgage bonds at 80 and IS, and second
mortgage bonds at go. Can absurdity go
further? Can all the lawyers in the Legis-
lature convince plain businessmen OF prac-
tical sense that such plan is at ali practica-
BILE? What is the meaning OF all the effort
to pass go bold an absurdity into law?
4+&