The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1884-03-02
senate ban Mo. l95.

SENATE Dill mo- koO.
In the issue Of the Baltimore american
Of February 18th, the day after the discus
sion Of the Midland lease before the SEN
ate committee, there appeared telegram
headed: "a Victory for Baltimore-The
Midland Lease Favorably Reported by the
Senate Committee on Roads,"
Think Of u, senators and delegates from
the city OF Richmond Think Of it, sena-
tors and delegates from oil parts Of vir-
1inis. you who are charged with the SOL
emn responsibility on legislating in the In
teres. OF and protecting the rights OF Vir-
giniai
While the words were yet warm with
which the representatives OF the Wall
street owners Of the Richmond and Dam
willie railroad protested before your COM
mittee that the action which they demand
ed was not In the interest Of Baltimore,
was not opposed to the interests OF Rich
mond, simultaneously with the announce
mept Of the report Of your committee, the
triumphant news is flashed by wire TO the
Baltimore press Of "a Victory for Balti-
more.D DO you not know, representatives
OF Virginia, that there are measures now
pending in the Maryland Legislature and
In the Common Council OF the city OF Bal
timore TO authorize the famous S2,000,000
loanY DO you not know that for two
months the Baltimore papers have been
teeming with glowing accounts OF the Ia
yorable progress OF negotiations between
the Merchants and Manufacturers Asso-
citation Of Baltimore and the Wall-street
owners OF the Richmond and Danville
railroad? Do you not know that the nego-
fiations were suspended for the reason that
il was found that lower rates could not be
gwen TO Baltimore over the Midland road
without infiicting serious injury upon the
interests OF the Richmond and Danyille {!
Now, where do we stand? Can any in
telligent mind fail TO draw the conclusion
from these premises? The bill In the Mary
land Legislature to authorize Baltimore to
lend the 100000 and the blu in the Vir-
gina Legislature 10 authorize the Rich
mond and Danville to lease the Virginia
Midland, introduced about the same time,
are manifestly parts Of one and the same
scheme; both are intended to remove the
legal distractions which now stand in the
way OF Baltimore on the one side, in max
iny the loan, and OF the Richmond and
Danville on the other, in giving the lower
differentlal rates which are demanded.
The Danville company meeting with an
unexpectedly vigorous opposition in the
Senate, staggered by the vigorous blows
which were dealt 1t in committee, are be-
lieved TO have abandoned Senate bill No.
354, "to authorize the lease Of the Mid
land" and to have fallen back upon Senate
bill No. 1875, which would accomplish the
same purpose. authorizing, as it does, any
railroad company to lease any railroad
which is not parallel or competing road.
As the Richmond and Danville and the
Virginia Midland converge at Danville, OF
course they are not parallel lines.
Railroad-men who have been consulted
say that under the peculiar circumstances
Of the case, the Virginia Midland being
under the control Of the Richmond and
Danyille, cannot be said to be, and in fact
is not, competing road. Now, let Senate
bill No. 135 be passed in its present shape,
and the whole railroad policy OF Virginia.
which has prevailed from the day when
railroad was first built, will be overthrown.
A huge railroad monopoly, covering one
half of the territory OF this Commonwealth,
will have been erected, under the control
Of Waltstreet operators. On one side OF
the banner Of this great monopoly will be
emblaZoncd:
~ Victory for Baltimore"
On the reverse side:
"virginia CITIES Laid Low. Damn the Public"
Can the Democratic party OF Virginia
afford TO bear the burthen Of such legisla-
tionp