The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1879-01-13
& ,cars, from sIr. Men,ay.

10 the EtfstoTs OF the Kicisr'Io1id Dtsf,ascts
Il find ii, yotir paper OF this morning q re-
,,ort NJ the sf,eect Of MFR. He. Parsans pe'
fore the committees the two houses OF Lne
Assembly on Roads and Internal NaYlgatiAo,ii
YESTERDAY evening, which is -lncorTecs IN
several particulars, and is calculated 10 make
/ o wron q tmpre ssion as to my position IN re-
aard to- the bill before the Assembly TO
transfer the canal 10 the Richmond and Al
tieuhany Railroad Company. Your report
| reTI,rese1,ts Mr.. Parsons as saying - be re-
preventative OF Richmond further expresses
i aiarm because it has been suggested that the
[bnilding.ef this railroad might hasten the
lbuilding OF q road to meet 1t from
Pittsburgb.o "The same gentleman also
objects that it would be against
1.-The interest of the State to send
her raw material beyond her limits"
"He also objected that this road would
be built by foreign capital" and " he
claims to be friend to this measure, and
recognizes it TO be project affecting the en-
tire State, and yet declares unless certain
local interests are specially guarded be will
place himself against it," As was reported
| in your paper as having appeared before the
| joint committee the day before and offered
certain amendments for the protection OF
Richmond, OF course it ,gilI be concluded
that I am the representative Of Richmond
referred to. &5r = Ea
heard MIR. Parsons's speech, and he did
not say that a representative Of Richmond
made these objections to his schene-at
least il he did I did not hear it. The
statements themselves, il intended to
refer to me, are not Il correct. The
amendments presented in the. interest
of Richmond were. those agreed upon
by the subcommittee OF the conference held
during the recess, consisting OF the repre-
sentatives Of the city, except Mr. WORKMAN,
the City Attorney, and certain members OF
the Council. They are such provisions as
should be inserted in the bill, in my opin-
ion, il the State of Virginia herself were to
undertake to turn the canal into railroad,
aud are vital to the interests OF this city ID
preserving her dock and Water-poWer. L
did say that as was informed that the pro-
iectors Of the Richmond asd Allegheny
railroad designed to extend it to Pittsburgh,
so as to carry the mineral wealth OF the
James-River Valley to that city, and as for
eien capital would therefore be called on to
build this road, that it would not follow, of
course, that the interests OF Richmond
would be cared for any further than
they were supposed to conduce to
the interests OF the owners OF the
road, and therefore we ought to be care
full to look to our own interest. | said
distinctly that had no objection to the eE-
tension OF the road to Pittsburgh. ] said not
one word about the impolicy OF sending the
raw material OF the State beyond her limits.
But all will agree with me, suppose, that
it will be better for the State could it he
manufactured within her borders. I made
no objection to foreign capital building the
road; but / look upon all capital as seeking
its own ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, regardless OF other
interests [ have not said | would oppose
the bill unless the interests OF Richmond
were specially guarded. but | reserve the
right to do as my best Judgment dictates. l
have not opposed the bill on the ground
that it contained grant OF immense value,
as ain also represented as saying, nor on
any ground. desire the railroad to be
built, but wish Richmond's interests pro-
tectcd in the charter, and shall exert myself
| to the utmost to accomplish this result.
| | find IN your paper letter calling atten-
ton to the bill / introduced to enable tue
city to buy the canal ii 1t is sold, ana the
question is asked il ii will not be breach
OF the contract between the city and her
bondholders if the limit OF her debt rs now
fixed be exceeded. [ would say that as the
LEGISLATURE retains the right to alter char
| tiers, that would enter into the contract De-
tween the city and her creditors, and they
might have no right to complain OF the ex-
ercise oil reserved power. AS the qucs-
ton raised could and would be settled by
the courts, however, before anything is
done, it is not for me, whatever my own
views might be on a careful examination OF
the question, to hesitate to place the city in
the position 10 protect herself as far as pos
sible in case a sale of the canal is made in
the foreclosure suit now in progress. This
is all that is attempted in the bill intro
duced by me. Very respectfully,
w. w. HENRY.
January IL, 1870.