The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1884-03-19
DOCK AND DRY-DOCK.
BILL RETURNED DIsAPPRo vED
The Governor objects 10 it ON 'he Ground
that IL is Too LatitidinOus and Indefinite
No puoruyu IN Vote ON IL.

The Governor Objects 10 it ON ,he Ground
that IL is Too LatitidinOus and Indefinite
No Quorum 90 Vote ON IL.
The Governor yesterday returned to the
Senate without bis signature Senate bill
No. $50, TO incorporate the Richmond Dock
and Dry-Dock Company.
The Governor, in his message TO. the
Senate, said that the bill " has been held
under consideration until the last day
granted by law to the Governor for several
reasons. The principal among these, al
though others existed, was 10 do nothing
that might sacrifice any real interest, pre-
seEt or future, OF the capital city OF the
Commonwealth. / have tried to give all
due weight to the suggestions Of benefit to
accrue to Richmond from an enterprise OF
the magnitude OF that proposed by the bill
in question. | would have been willing
TO anv lawful and needfnl extent to subord-
mate private interests to large, certain,
and beneficial public ends. But the re-
suit of close examination into this mea-
sure Is to force me to return the bill
without my signature. The title of the
bill in no sense sets forth the OBJ
ject which it makes possible, and does not
describe the extraordinary powers and
privileges to be found in the actual provi-
sions OF the bill. The first section grants
to the proposed company the right to con-
demn river frontage and an acreage OF
private property out Of all proportion TO
the purposes which the title announces,
or which can be necessary to the opera
tions OF a dock and dry-dock company. /
do not understand why the persons seek
ing to organize themselves into this cor
poration should be given the wholesale
privilege to condemn and force to sale
under the terms Of condemnation the
property OF other persons who have equal
claim TO the favor and protection OF the
State. Why should not the projectors OF
q scheme intended surely to result in the
individual or aggregate profit OF those con-
ceTned in it be made to seek the same way
for acquiring the property they need as
private citizens OF Virginia have to
take? OF course there is an exception to
the rule, which would furnish the
only proper answer to this ques-
tion, and the exception is single.
II is where some imperative public de-.
mand exists for the subordination OF pri-
yate rights TO the general good, as in the
case OF an essential line for travel and
transportation. &c. But even the rule OBJ
tainS and the exception is restricted to the
extent that the indispensable railway or
necessary canal can take no more OF the
property Of the citizen than is absolutely
required to furnish the path safe and con-
yenient for the public carrier.
"There are other objections TO the bill
TO be found in the unusual and unneces-
sary powers for the construction OF roads
and canals for the acquisition and control
OF water-poweT, &c. and particular obiec-
ton is had TO the indefinite language rs to
the location OF the docks and works. Who
is to determine what nearness to Richmond
will mean or what distance from Richmond
will forfeit the terms OF the charter?
CIVILIAN +. CAMERON"
The question being, Shall the bill pass,
the Governors objections to the contrary
Notwithstanding? the vote resulted-ayeS,
15: noes. 5-nO quorum; and the Senate
then adjourned, on motion OF Mr.. Akin
son,