Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1883-03-22
rag RAILROAD PROBLEM.

From the Banner Report.

tu tAlln 4NOo0Nlis ~ AoN ufoNo y hAo
mind to vote for the substitution Of
the Burrus amendment for the caucus
bill, and to then vote for the bill on
its final passage. As the argument
proceeded he found there were a
number Of Democrats who felt as he
did on this subject He felt then that
something he might say would do
something toward saving Tennessee
from a blow which be thought would
paralyEs her best interests. He hated
to differ from others in his party. He
was satisfied that these differences Of
opinion resulted more from the differs
ent sentiments of the people OF the
sections they represented. In Mont
gomery county neither himself nor his
colleague on the foor, nor General
Bate, said anything of dragging down
the railroads Ofthe State as a criminal
to justice. They both recognized that
the Bate platform promised to see JUS
tice done between the people and the
railroads.
He believed that at least three fea
lures of this bill were unconstitution-
al, and he could not vote iorit without
violating his oath of Office.
This bill was directly in conflict
with the spirit OF the constitution OF
the State. Article IL, section 10 de-
clared in favor OF encouraging a sys-
tenn of internal improvements. Did
fhsS Kill rropooa - .taovrooo svkorr.l
improvements? Was it calculated to
develop Tennessee? The gentleman
from Sumner had said that old rail-
road attorneys, and no one else, we're
here Directing TO this bill. lie
believed that conversation held by
Mr.. John Scott with! Mr.. Head had
prevented the building of a road from
Knoxville to Lebanon. He wss con-
WINGED that it would be unsafe to
invest dollar in Tennessee.
Mr.. Head said that he had about
FIVE minutes talk with Mr.. Scott, and
had said that there was no desire to
check the building of new roads, II
he had been scared he was the easiest
scared man he ever saw.
MIR. Milliken said that no man could
doubt that the building of this road
would have been of great benefit to
the State. 1t would have established
shorter line of communication from
New York to st. Louis than any in
existence.
Mr.. Scott after leaving Tennessee
had written a letter saying that he
found in that State a body of legisla-
tors so strongly imbued with the spirit
of a railroad commission that he would
advise railroad projectors to keep
away
Mr. Milliken also read from a let
ter Of DR.. J. A. Atchisou in the same
spirit. Here were at least two men
not attorneys OF old roads protesting
against this legislation.
The speaker also spoke of the pros
posed Cincinnati, Green River and
Nashville railroad. Progress in this
matter had been stopped until it might
be seen whether this Legislature was
going to pass legislation which would
make it Improbable to proceed fur
Their.
The gentleman then read from the
American of to day, the interview
with Major Gordon. This gentleman
was of the opinion that the adoption
Of the proposed legislation, even if
repealed in a few years, would serve
to deter the investment of capital in
railroad enterprises in the State. 1t
would prevent the building Of a road
proposed by himself and others,
road which would strike through the
very heart Of the mineral belt of
Middle Tennessee, running from
Evansville, down through North Ala.
bama.
If gentlemen would lay aside preju>
dice and feeling, and look at this guess
ton as statesmen, they would zee that
they could not afford TO enact legisla-
ton which would retard the Increase
of railroad facilities.
The large amout OF railroad prop
erty in Pennsylvania has reduced the
taxes Of the people to mere song.
Let gentlemen look at the States
around her, building new roads and
deriving the benefits therefrom, and
then ask themselves If Tennessee
could afford TO stand back in this
march OF progressl
AS to the constitutionality of the
bill he was satisfied that nine tenths of
the members Of the bar of Tennessee
agreed with him, and that he was sup
ported by the decisions OF the Supreme
Court.
He believed the Legislature had the
right to declare any unjust discrimi-
nation in freights ofrailreads in Ten
nessee, and to fix penalties, but this
power must not be confined with the
power to fix rates OF common carriers.
The Legislature may declare that
the railroads may not charge one man
more for exactly the same transporta-
tion than another.
The railroads could not say to one
town, Grow and flourish" and to
another, Perish" This power was
not granted to their charters. How
ever, the State could not say that be-
cause there was discrimination the
power Of fixing rates should be taken
away and put in the hands Of com
mission. This was where an injunction
would be granted against the commits
sioners and sustained by any respecta.
BILE court in the State.
The caucus bill declared that there
should be no appeal from the decision
of the commission.
Why not adopt bill like that oil
the gentleman from Rutherford, in
fiicting penalty for failure to comply
with the recommendations OF the com
mittee, and allowing the injured citi,
zens to recover twice ehe excess OF
charges. If the railroads tried to OBJ
tain any injunction in a case of this