Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1886-11-05
The FIr.. Railroad Hearing

lue rhlhOAd committees OF the two houses
held joint hearing in the Senate cham Der
! Tuesday evening to consider the subject Of a
railroad commission. The room was filled
with interested spectators. Mr.. Writer'S of
Milton, Col. A. b. Jewett of ST. Johnsbury,
MIR. Noble Of st. Adams, Mr. Clement of
Rutland and others were present to represent
the interest of the railroads. This chairmeu.
Mr.. Marsh and Senator Stoddard, announced
! the object OF the meeting and called on any
one pres mt TO state their views on the cues
ton. Mr.. Higbee Of Charlotte then address.
ed the committee. He defined the object Of
his BILL and what he understood would be its
! practical working If accepted He said that
q commission had been demanded by the peo-
| pie, and the only question to discuss was a.
to what sort Of a commission the committee
would recommend. He gave an account of
the working OF commissions in other states
and especially OF the one in Massachusetts
which he considered tue best and thought
applicable for use in our state. His bill he
said, had as its basis the Massachusetts avs.
TEN, and differed from it only in two points
which were, first, the mode OF appointment
proposed, and second the measures for en-
forcement. The mode of appointment was
not the most material part of commission
bill, but he thought election by the leRisla-
ture as his bill provided, a better method
sA"h oPPOAhemoht w huy Ono person. AS TO
the method OF enforcement, he said that up.
on reflection he had decided to follow the
Massachusetts law which provides for no
compulsory or arbitrary measures, and re-
quires the commission to make their recon-
mendations to the railroads and report them
to the legislature. He would therefore like
to withdraw the provisions in his bill which
imposed penalty for neglect or refusal on
the part of railroads to comply with the de-
cision of the commission. He gave a history
OF the Massachusetts commission and its sue
cessful working, aud strongly urged the &C
ceptaDee OF his bill with the proposed amend
ment.
Col. A. F. Walker spoke in behalf of the
Ripley bill. He said that he had not expect
cd TO be present but, since he was called up
on, he would say that be thought that, since
our legislative sessions we're short and held
only blennaly, some definite method Of en-
torcement of the commission recommended
tions ought to be provided. The Ripley bill
followed the Masssch usetts system. but had
In addition some provisions which he under
stood the Massachusetts commission had
found desirable for their system, and which
he thought necessary for an effective com
mission in this state. These additions were
mainly those giving means OF enforcement
to the courts by mdnddmus and the provision
that the recommendations of the board should
be prtHd tdcie reasonable. The latter was
what the New York commission had recon-
mended to its legislature for adoption and
was one OF the features of the much praised
Cullom bill. In answer to inquiries of Messrs.
Witters Jewett Noble and Clement. Col
Walker said that he thought the provisions
OF the Ripley bill were fair towards the rail
roads, and better adapted to the needs Of this
state than purely advisory commission such
as exists in Massachusetts,.
Col. J1wett said that so far as he knew. the
railroads did not object to a commission, but
that they did not want one which would ham
per them in their work and decrease the val
ne OF their investment securities Vermont
had many railroads, and she wanted and
needed more. The legislature should take
care and not enact such stringent laws that it
would be difficult to obtain money from for
eign investors to use in railroads in Vermont
Money is g coward and if too much mower
was given commission it would deter in
vestments from icing made in Vermont rail-
roads. Vermont is a rural district and ia well
supplied with railroads which have been well
conducted under the old system. The needs
OF this state are peculiar and we should not
follow the stringent law OF Illinois and other
states. A good commission, like that of
Massachusetts, he would second. He was in
favor OF purely advisory commission.
MIR. Noble said that the present law of the
state provided remedy for every grievance
against railroads except one, and that was
the matter of grade crossings A commission
law would leave the present laws of the state
in force, and all that was needed was an ad-
vlsory commission to investigate the work.
ings OF railroads aud recommend to the lepis.
lature the laws necessary to remedy whatever
grievance might arise. He was in favor of
legislation on the subject of grade crossings.
The interests of the people and the railroads
we're one. Railroads did not seek to bear
down upon the people and the latter should
carefully avoid any oppression of the roads
He did not understand that the Massachusetts
commission had desired that any special DOW
err OF enforcement should be given them. II
could be shown that the Massachusetts, com.
mission has never found il necessary TO resort
to the courts, but that the railroads complied
readily with their recommendations. II was
for the interest of the railroads TO do 30. The
railroads were not opposed TO a commission.
but would welcome the right kind of a law
which would be an aid rather than hind.
rance TO their business. Au advisory COM
mission like that OF Massachusetts, was what
was best for this state, and there were bills
before the legislature which proposed such a
After some further discussion the he airing
was adjourned until Thursday evening at
O'Clock.
-----------------
The President gives out word to Office seek,