Daily Republican., 1881-04-09
SATURDAY. APRILs. 1881.
4 Covert Attack on tn" New Castle
Deiegatca.

The gross and incorrect charge made
in the EN sry Evening during The week
that the opposition of Anthony Higgins
ESc., t. tha Peninsula, Baltimore ana
Ohio Ellru3,. was the cause ot its de
feat, was to- rjiiruluuS to be- for Il mo-
mnnt believes! hy any intelligent per
son. The statement equally slAHdrred
the New Caste delegation, composed
ormtrllig,n'. honorable gentlemen. in
capable .; beiug the tools ami followers
OF any oue raan, 1t happened that the
vompctin. Peninsula line was a pet
scheme. ot t&r Every Evening. and its
whole cnrr.y and strength were thrown
INTO that bill. not dreaming OF defeat
but when IN" bill WAS voluntarily with
drawn without even pushing 1t to trial
of strength in either House, the infu-
encr of the Grrat drum organ OF pro.
frsrd independence was shown to be so
intinitrSul"y small, that somebody o.
some number Of gentlemen had to be
selected somewhere upon whom to
throw the blam". rather tLan let it re-
remain wGerc it belonged, and in look
Ing around for tn" Scapc goats upon
which to lay lis weakness. it naturally
picked out Mr.. Higgins and some ot
The New Castle delegation. Why does
not the Every Evening throw the blame
of the defeat Of its pet bljl ON those who
were rea " responsible for its defeat :"
Whenever 1t wanted a bill Of doubtful
political pro1rirty passed. it held the
solid delegation Of Kent aud Su<S"N
well in hand for that purpose. That
same solid delegation would harc.pas>-
ed the defeated railroad bill Why
should The New Caste delegation h"
made solid" Have they not the night
to be independent and vote their scnti- |
ments eOuaily as much 80 as the Dcmo- |
cHtic delegation from the lower
counties? The bill anyhow would hay"
been of more benefit to the lower
counties than to New Castle. Why !
then are nor those Democratic members |
from those counties who We're opposed
to the passage Of the bill not CcnSured
and charged With lis defeat?
We believe it is fact that even the
profcSSed trieR 's of the bill were
strangely indifferent "A, to whether it
passed or not and until they we're in
earnest themselves they should not he
50 ready to charge others with what
they themselves were guilty.
Now to III" facts of the case. An ap-
pication was made to the Legislature
for charter for a competing line down
the Peninsula understood to be for the
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. That
had, early in the session fath-
cred and fQsHcred the Delaware Western
when the Baltimore &
Ohio y6ople saw what they thought to
be better chance for through line to
Philadelphia they abandoned the Della.
Western charter to its fate and as it
thought bought the F., W. 4 b. road,
They found there were others as sharp
rs them At til" game o. railroad, and 4
little to thtir surprise they found that
What they supposed WAS theirs the
PENNSYLVANIA road had snatchcd from
them. Then it was they fell back on
rhe Delaware Western charter and
though they had before broken faith
and abandoned it, their short comings
We're overlooked and the charter was
granted, It need not be thought
II strange that the people OF Delaware
careful Of how they dispose of the rail
road franchises ola small State, should
have thought that the chartering of one
main line Of railroad through the State
at one term Of the Legislature should
I've sufficient for the same line, eSpcci
ally when il was tudnd that that line
would inur" more 10 the benefit Of
MARYLAND than of Dclaware-whcn ii
was 10 tap all the Eastern Shor"
railroads ard not only d"traCt trade
from the old line but would check the
growth Of such tlourishing towns as
Clayton, Wyoming, FELTON,,
Harrington and other towns farther
south. The fact is it would have been
q Maryland road entirely on Delaware
soil. As it would have been no benefit
whatever to any considerable part Of
New Castle county except Newark and
Glasgow, We need not wonder why such
az McssrS. Eliason,
Townsend and WOodkecper, from the
lower part OF New Castle, were not en-
in favor Of the passage Of the
bill. 1t needed not Mr. Higgins nor
any other gentleman TO influence them.
Under the principle Of personal inter
est they would be opposed to it. 1t IS
likely the same principle influenced
members from Kent and Sussex to op-
pose it. why then lay the blame on
Mr.. Higgins? We doubt very much if
that gentleman ever turned his hand
one way or the other; certain we are
that he did not app,ar at Dover as a !
lobbyist against the new line,
Those who know MeSSrs. Bradford,
Swayne, Eastburn and other delegates
from New Castle, know that they are
gentlemen having minds of their own
and are not likely to be easily intlucn-
ced by Mr., Higgins or any other gentle
nan who would attempt to control their
opinions
MI 6 hn E,-npi,,,