The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1889-10-17
Thu Claim, of the Lessses.

In6 claim OF LLb A6SSeCc-
The legislature now knows the exact
amount which tbs leSsees of the Western
and Alta tic railroad want the state 10 pay
them for bettermentS 1t i SSS7, Az >.
This is about $40. 900 more than the legis-
lative commission reported the betterments
to be worth. The claimants, however, were
not expected TO be modes, in their demands.
They themselves appear TO think that their
claim is a pretty big one, because they
stated, through their spokesman before the
joint committee, that they would gladly
accept the amount reported by the commits
sion. Indeed, they would willingly accept.
doubtless, a great deal less than that
amount
According to the claim they make they
propose that the STATE snail get only about
seventeen years rent for twenty years use
of the road. 1t is true that the road is in
better condition than when the lessees
received it, but was it not understood, when
the lessees accepted it, that it was TO be put
in better condition without any expense to
the states The lease was for twenty years.
The 1essees and the state knew that the rails
and ties would have to be renewed, during
that time, once and probably twice, and that
If the roads business increased as much as
it was expected it would, side tracks and
station-houses would have to be built, but
none Of the interested parties had any idea
that the state would have to pay for these
Improvements. II there had been such an
idea it would have found expression in the
lease act. The intention was undoubtedly
that thslessees should operate the road for
twenty years and should have the right
to make such improvements as were
found 70 be necessary to meet the demands
OF its business. Not dollar was spent in
improvements at the request of the state, or
TO benefit the state. The improvements
were solely and wholly for the benefit of
the lessees. They admit that they have
made money out Of the road, and it is quite
certain that they could not have done so if
they had not made the improvements.
What better evidence is needed, therefore,
that when the lessees took the road they did
80 with the understanding that they should
improve it at their own expensel
In his argument before the joint COM
mittee Senator Brown laid great stress on
the clause in the lease which requires that
the road shall be returned to the state in as
good condition as it was when the lessees
received it. He CONSTITUTES 1t to mean that
the lessees may run the road down so that
it will be in no better condition than it was
when it was received, aud that the state will
violate its contract if it refuses to permit
the road to be partly wrecked to get it into
that condition.
he knows, and every one else, who has
given the matter the slightest attention,
knows, that the clause in the lease relative
to the condition in which the road shall be
returned was put there to prevent the road
from being wrecked. 1t means that the
road shall not be returned to the state in
condition unfit to be operated. 1t do1s not
mean that the state shall pay for improve
ments that the lessees IN ay have put upon
it, and that meaning cannot be tortured
from it.
The state demands nothing except that
the letter and spirit of the lease shall be
complied with, aud it will not violate its
contract with the lessees if it refuses to per-
NIT them to run down the road When
the lease was made the road was equal to
the demands of the traffic upon it. 1t is
doubtful if it is any more than equal to that
now, and as rails, even Of STEEL last a very
few years, it is probable that the rails of
the road will be pretty nearly worn out at
the end of the lease.
The people are watching this fight for
compensation for betterments with very
great interest, and they will be greatly dis
appointed if their representatives permit
the state to get the worst of it.