Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1882-12-01

DtdlG W uCt us COulInSslOuCIb w,
ing the penalty for violation OF the law 49,,
allowing commissioners To make examina-
tons on their own notion or on any applca-
ton which IN their opinion Is sufficient to
warrant it (4, providing tnat the commits
sioners shall give such immediate publicity
TO their conclusions and reaeons therefor mp
on hearings and investigation rs may be
thought proper ; (5), prohibits the commits
sioners from receiving favors from railroad
corporations, or making any contracts with
them, other than as common carriers. The
amendments were adopted. Senator Walk
er then advocated the bill. He compared its
provisions with the provisions of the present
law, and said they differed principally in the
fact that his bill provided that the commits
sioners should not be paid unless they actual
ly did the work. Now the commissioners
get $500 year for doing almost nothing
lie read extensively from Charles Francis
Adams's work on "Railroads, their origin and
Problems" for the purpose of showing that
the railroads were common carriers and, as
such, have public as well as private rights
and as such should be amcnable to wise leg
islation for the protection of both public
and railroads. lie claimed that the proposed
legislation was in the interests of the railroads
and would tend to establish more amcable
relations between well conducted roads and
the public, than now exists.
Senator ldc opened by referring to the
fact that in the very fully attended hearings
which the committee gave on this bill, no
one appeared before the committee and no
petitions were presented asking for this leg
islation with the exception of one man and
that man was the Senator who introduced it.
He considered that is was a significant fact
that nothing was heard from the very roads
who were most concerned with this bill
notably the Delaware and Hudson Canal
company and roads in southwestern portions
of the State.
All the other roads did appear and protest
aga mist the bill as ruinous to their interests
and indirectly to the interests of the State.
1t is claimed by the advocates of the bill
that it gives to these commissioners absolute
ly no powers only to ascertain and fluid out the
abuses, which very likely exist in some in
stances. If this is all that is meant, why the
necessity of this commission ? Why have a
commission to go to junketing around the
State to find out and report facts which
everybody knows already. We have good
law now, and why the necessity Of board
of three Thereby increasing tue expense at
no aopr ciaLle gain to the State.
AS read il, he SAID, the first three line S
of section 4 do give these commissions abso-
lutte control on the railro Ids in the State. In
ugud tothe expense it seems anomalous that
tn railroads shou d pay for THIS commission
The expense is going tocume out Of the roads
who are least able to lear it. a poor f0ad
that is struggling along tor existence and fail
necessarily To Accommodate any person along
their line is The one that will bc compa II d
OF aud they must be saddlcd with the whole
expense Of this commission. a salary such
as IS proposed is utterly inadequate to secure
competent men. The remedy Tor all
the evils which are charged, if there are
such evils, lies in cuuris not in such
a commission ms it is proposed 10 create aud
it is unwsc to take the power from its
proper place aud place it in the hands of AN
incompetent commission who are a an en-
pensc of $4,000. TO find out just what is al
ready known and then have it go to the Lesis-
luturc for remedy. What should the rail
road pay this 5000? What the propricty
Why should the railroads be burdCncd by
this do not consider, he said, that the ill.,
terests of the railroads and people of the State
are hostile, quite the reverse. This bill will
operate very dsastrously against the poor
roads and the new roads. 1t will be i'm.
possible to find men in the State competent
to do the work who are not directly or in
directly connected with railroad interests, Men
| who do not knows anything about the bu-
sncss are the one who are 10 do the invcstig-
alton. The Massachusetts law Oh this sub.
ject commcnds itself because of the com.
petcnt and able men who are back Of it,
The biennial policy of the State will render
in operation the securing by training, Of good
men for this position. The bill will not give
the least relief from the evils which exist in
certain sections of the State.
Senator Colburn of Rutland advocated the
passage of the bill. He thought from the fact
that the report of the committee was anna ority
report that there were others who were in iavoi
of the bill. 1t was advisable, in his opinion
as furnishing a board where all differences
and grievances between the people and rail
roads might be heard and adjudicated with
out bringing them into the Legislature.
Senator Bingham opposed the bill and said
that it appeared before the committee that
the railroads were unanimous in saying that
it would be unjust and oppressive us inter
fcnng with vested rights and placing the bur
den on the new roads and not on the road.
who are able to bear it,
| Senator Walker again advocated the pas
sage of the bill. He said he considered il
principally the business and night OF the in
PRODUCER, when measure of tins kind was in
troduced, to support it. lie knew many who
had appeared from all portions of the State
favorlng this bill and renewed his argument
that the people demand redress from existing
evils and the only question is how far shal
we go?" lie claimed that the bill was no
going TO interfere with vested rights 50 as I,
injurc any road. 1t is necessary function
of the State to supervise the affairs of il!
corporations, and exercise the necessary polio,
powers of the State. lie thought there wcr,
no more poor roads in Vermont than il
other States. The poor roads here rs else
where, were under the control and manage
mcnt of Weather roads.
Senator Morgan of Franklin favored til,
bill. He thought it was not possible for tn
Legislature to injure the railroads which hat
vested rights, by the passage of this bill, bu
it could supervise and regulate those whicl
had not these rights, He wished 10 be jus
and fair toward both people and railroad
and was neither hostile nor prejudiced il
favor of the railroads of the State, but was
friend of railroads when rightly managed
lie quoted from ''Rediicld on Railroads." /,
show that it was right for Legislatures t,
regulate corporations.
After mature consideration he believe,
that il was n right AMI equitable measure an,
should become II law. Senator Crane of Or
leans, opposed the hill. He thought the ob
lection was not that it was uncoustitutiona
or would injurc somebody's Interests bu
that it WAS impracictble. He considere,
the cases ci'ei IN other States and countries
AS not at all parallel with the situation il
tbs State The law was amply sulli len
now tor the procuring OF redress for gricv
auc' sasairs railrmd 90 poralions, The b ulo
rrsulied,y,as l2, nays IL, anu the third rtadln,
was refused. Yeas, Barber, Buinal, Ch'lis
Cnlhurn, E1'ey, Hogan, Howard, Prrkin.
Wall, Whnconb; Nays, Bingham, Boyden
Bralnerd (ot Franklin,) Cnamberlin. Crane
Dartt, Fletcher, Gilmore, Goodwin, Ide
Jon S, Kellon, Mcintosh, Page, Templeton
absent, Braincrd .of Caledonia and Martin
school Text Books.
The House Committee on Education hav
reported a bill (lI. 402,) relating TO tex
books in schools, which provides that tn