The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1878-11-21

VALLEY Il. R.-At the adjourned meet
ing of the stockholders of the Valley Rail-
road held on Thursday last, nothing definite,
or of much Importance TRANSFERRED. The
proposition Tor division of the road, as re-
ported in our last issue, was signed by the
Valley proxies, subject to the ratification of
their principals. and referred to the proxies
of the B. & O. r, r. and Baltimore city, for
approval and by their principals. AS stated
before, it provides that Baltimore city and
the B. &c o. K. r. shall take full possession
of the completed road to Harrisonburg, free
of all membranes. In consideration of
which the Maryland stockholders relinquish
all right, title and interest to the road south
of Stanton, together with $214, 900 in town
and county bonds now held by the B. & O.
R. r. as collateral for $l95, 200 advanced to
the Valley Company.
Should this proposition be accepted the
Valley stockholders propose to go ahead and
complete the road, and pledge themselves to
use every means to procure proper legisla-
ton to enable them to proceed.
Mr.. VIM. Keyser was elected President
unan imously, and the old board of directors
re- elected with the exception Of Col. VIM.
Allen, whose place was supplied by the cleo =
ton of VIM. Anderson, ESQ.,, of Lexington.
The meeting then adjourned to Tuesday.
December 3d. by which time the proposition
will have been accepted or rejected, the lat
ter being by far the most probable.
Before the meeting adjourned, Maj. Dor
man stated that Messrs. Mason, Shanahan &
Co. had made a bid to complete the entire
line to Salem.
ROANOKE's ATTITUDE.
The county of Roanoke has been conspicu
GUS for the absence of its representatives from
the recent meetings of the Valley R. r.
stockholders. Up on inquiry we learn that
its attitude is about as follows: In 1870
Roanoke subscribed 100000 to the capital
stock OF the Valley Railroad Company, but
only small portion of the bonds were deliv-
cred and none of them negotiated, before
Judge Wingfeld awarded an injunction re-
straining their negotiation. This injunction,
though never perpetuated, has never been
dissolved. In this respect Roanoke is better
off than the counties of Roekbridge and Bot
etourt whose bonds were. in part, delivered,
and upon which they are now paying inter-
est annually. For several years Roanoke
was regularly represented at the meetings
of the stockholders, by Judge H. E. Blair and
Col. G. W. Hansbrough, at first, and after
wards by the latter alone. OF late, howev-
er, Roanoke has studiously refrained from
having any representation at the stockhold-
ers' meetings. During the recent meeting,
Col. Hansbrough was in the city, but, intent
on the design of his county to withdraw. if
possible, its subscription, and escape paying
money for railroad which seems very I'M
likels, ever to be completed, was careful not
to complicate the situation of his people by
appearing in the meeting and taking part in
its procee dings.
We understand that Col. Hansbrough and
Judge W. J. Robertson, counsel for Roanoke
county, have had consultations on this sub
ject, and are of opinion chat, under the act
of the Virginia Leg islature, passed in 1873,
requiring the Valley Company to put their
road under contract to be completed within
two years of that date, under penalty of for
feiture of charter privileges, Roanoke has
the right, absolutely, even now, to Withdraw
and annul her subscription, and will advise
the adoption Of such course by the Board Of
supervisors, unless at the adjourned meeting
to be held on the Sd of December, some de-
cided measures shall be taken looking to the
certain and speedy construction of the road
from Staunton to Salem.