The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1889-08-10
A Point "a L overlookea.

in the discussion o. the bo5terment ques-
ton very important point laaie By Repre-
sentative ~. W. Gordon, in MS speech last
week, seer' to DC lost sight Of He pointed
out that those Who are claiming compensa-
ton for betterments were not operating the
ROAD and wore not in control Of L. Senator
Brown is operating the roal, having ieasei
it from those who leased it from the state.
This being the situation. how is it posi-
bic for the clsimaats for compensation for
betterments to let the road det -riorate from
the pres mt Ii ne until the end of the lease,
and IN that way get part of what they ia
sist is due to them2 The claimants say lat
it takes from 5000 to $4,000 per an
mum &c keep the road in its present condi-
ton, and suggest the possibility of cutting
down the expenditures one-half and put
the money thus saved into their pockets.
Unless there is u secret understand { bs-
tween them and the lessee who crates the
road the scheme suggested could not be car
ried out. Why should Senator Brown let
the road run down. He has a very small
interest in the lease from the state His
great interest is in the lease which he has
state. Il lie should let the road run down,
and accidents should happen. would he not
be responsible TO the amount Of the damage
donei Would those from whom he leased
the road take his place and pay the dam
ages If tley would then, as already stated,
the public does not know the relations
which exist between him and those from
whom he obtained posseSsi IN OF the road.
II there is no secret understanding be-
tween the senltor and those from whom he
leased the road then there is no probability
that the road will be permitted to run
down, and it is simply waste of time to
discuss that phase of the question. The
senator, in all probability, will keep the
road in first-class condition as long as he
continues to operate it. II is to his interest
to do so. The traffic of the road requires
that the roadbed shall be KEEP, in repair.
1t is unjust to those members of the legis-
lature who object to recognizing any claim
for betterments, and to the people whom
they represent, to suggest that they do not
want to pay for betterments for tine reason
that they think the state cannot, under the
lease, be compelled to pay for them. The
truth is that they do not think the staJe
ought 10 pay anything for them. They be-
lieve that the improvements which have
been made to the property have much more
than paid for themselves. 1t is true that
the state is richer because Of them, but so
are the lessees. They would not have been
made had not the lessees considered them to
be good inve tment.
If it is admitted that under the terms Of
the lease there is no ground for a claim for
betterments, there is no foundation for such
claim on equitable grounds, unless it can
be shown that the present lessees are the
only ones who would have takon the road
upon as good terms for the state as they
took it. If other parties would have taken
the road upon the terms of the present lease
aud made all imDrovems It's necessary to
operate it successfully without making any
claim for becterments, where is the equity
in paying the present le5sees for better
ments!