Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1886-05-25
COMMUNICATED.

THE RICHMOND AND DhEVILLE RAILROAD.
The article signed Justice, published in
the GAZETTE of Tuesday last, was too hur-
riedly written to do moro than rerlonstrate
against the proposed absorption Of the Fir.
ginia Midland Railway by the Richmond
and Danvillc Apart from the legal ques-
ton, apart from gross violation of the leg
isation OF the State, there are very many
reasons to alarm the State ct this action.
The corporations of this day are go numer
Gus, so powerful, that Vanderbilt but ex
pressed their views when he said in answer
TO question as to what the people would
think of his proposed action, "d-n the peo-
in this absorption Of naturally rival and
connecting line by the L. & D., though sol.
emnly forbidden To do so by an act of the
General Assembly Of Virginia. A glance
at the map OF Virginia shows that the two
| roads referred to ere really parallel lines
| The fact that they are competing lines is
demonstrated when it is remembered that
the lines meet at Danvile and terminate
the one at West Point, the other at Alexan-
dria, both upon deep water. The amend
ments to the Senate bill, which were adopt
ed, declared that the Richmond and Dan
Vile should not hold or acquire stock, !"
= extend aid TO or lease, use or op-
crate the works Of any railroad company
incorporated by the laws of this State, the
| line OF which is not actually and physically
connected with its line, or is parallel to or Il
competing limo with lis own line II the
claimed power 10 consolidate existed when
this act was passed, in November, 1854, it
was thereby repealed, and the legislative
will clearly defined. Well may the curious
ask if the power to lease, etc., existed, why
the necessity for the bill introduced to allow
the lease, etc. The power did not exist as
a matter of general law, for the Supreme
Court of the. United States has declared,
| III Otto ~ "a lease by railroad company
of all Its road rolling stock, and franchises
for which no authority Is given in its char
ter is ultra wires and void" "a contract
by which the company renders itself
incapable Of performing its duties to the
public, or attempts to absolve itself from its
obligations without the consent of the State,
violates its charter, and is forbidden by pub
lie policy. 1t is, therefore, void" Against
the law as laid down by this august tribunal,
against the explicit language of the statute,
| il is said these two roads are now blended
|
move is q natural inquiry of people who
are to. day burdened with debt contracted
TO construct this road What will be the
outcome if the will of tho State solcmnly
expressed may be thwarted by its creature
is question which appeals to the thought
| fui lover Of his Stale. But what will be the
result of blending of naturally competing
lines is q further reaching question. The
purchase of an office in Washington, at
cost of Sl27 900; OF eighteen acres of land ut
the southern end Of the Long Bridge, as is
reported; the proposed construction of q
track between Alexandria and Washington
all evidence the purpose of this syn
6icatc 10 make Alexandria & way
station. and foreign State tho terminus Of Il road
| which should be controlled by Virginia. Tho
| writer said, in appealing to the Legislature in
! 1884 against tho proposed consolidation scheme :
do not help by your vote to pass bill, the effect
| OF which is to surrender resident management
to men in Now York when it should he controlled
| in Virginia" To views such rs these the Legis-
| laturc yielded and refused to grant tho powers
lately assumed. But it may be said this agree
mcnt is already executed and cannot be rescindcd
| So it was said in the already cited, hut tho
Supreme Court of tho United States brushed aside
! the sophistry of tho argument (thc case was
| identical with thisl. "Uaving entered into the
agreement it was the duty of the company to re-
| sc!nd or abandon 1t AZ tho earliest moment.
| Can this performance of legal duty duty both
| to stockholders of the company and to the
public, give to plaintiffs right of action? Can
they found such right on agreement void for
| want of corporate authority and forbidden by tho
policy of tho law? To hold that they car is in
our opinion, to hold that any act performed in
| executing void contract makes all its parts
valid. and that tho more tina: is done under
contract forbidden by law the stronger is the
| claim to its enforcement by the Courts"
Day by day tho old familiar faces Oh the Vir-
| gaia Midland road exchanged for nc,y men.
| Deeper impressed upon tho mind of those in au-
thority that corporation which could so control
! the Legislature of 19Sl-1SSl that debt of
$500 600 due by it to Tic State could no paid or
at less than half lis value, il alipowcrtnl, and
may disregard legislative will is the conviction
| Incoming. And unless tho people Of this State
and of this city rise mp to resist this conduct the
| "d-n tho people idea will indeed rule Virginia.
JUSTICE.
YE