Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1890-02-01
CHARTER REPEALED.
THEA eAcTlNcoRpoRATINe THE AMERl-
CAN TOBACCO COMPANY
ANNULlED.
fts BROAD Provisions Arouse tho Fears Of
the Farmers and the Legislature
Hccds Their Wishes.

the State of New Jersey.
The bill repeating the act OF incorpora-
ton. which was introduced in the House
by Nlr. Flood almost before the drying OF
the ink with which Governor Mckinney
approved the law. passed the Senate yes
torday and now goes to the Governor for
bis signature.
THg SENATE TAXES HOLD.
Alta few minutes after 1 o'clock yester-
day Mr.. Hurt called for the special and
continuing order which had been fixed for
consideration on Thursday" House bill
10 repeal the charter Of the American To-
baccO Company.
After brief informal talk rs 20 whether
this bill or that 90 abolish the compulsory
pilotagc OF coastwiso vessels had priority IT
wns decided by common consent 90 takeup
the former. and then there followed one OF
the most extended and interesting debates
of the session.
40 RIGHT TO REPEAL.
IF We have the right 10 repeal. :" said
Mr. Moore. who opened the discussion.
~ am i'm favor OF repeating. IL we have
not the night do not think we ought to
trv tn do il. IL has never been disputed
that a Legislature has right TO annul the
privileges Of public. corporation. with
private corporations the case Is different,
and the American Tobacco Company Is a
private corporation. Professor Minor IN
ihe first volume Of his Institutes saws that
g. impair the obligations Of a contract be-
fore its expiration Cn such case a. thls)
unconstitutional. And the only way the
charter of the American Tobacco Com
pany can be revoked is in the event that
ihe company have refused to accept the
charter Acceptance must be presumed
unless proof is shown to the contrary.
Proof has here been given OF acceptance"
The cOrporators have accepted the char
Ter. and IN Mr. Moore's opinion the act.
whether good or bad, should stand Tor nifty
years.
AN OPPOSITE vHw.
MIR. Peters favored the repeal. II the
carporators had accepted" the charter 1t
was but n move to prevent the Legislature
from annulling il after reasonable notice
was served on them that the Legislature
would annul their franchises That notice
WAS In the shape of the resolution intro
duced looking to the recall of the bill. As
to the merits of the measuTe-there were
certain privileges asked that he could not
endorso The principle of the scheme was
wrong. To give company existence Tor
fifty years without amendment or repeal OF
the charter was en0ngh TO MAKE man
stop and think Fifty years is long
time. Again: He was opposed 10
the company because il was in the
nature of q trust. He was opposed to
trusts and would always use his best en-
deavOrs 10 break up such monopolies. lie
wanted to see the State built up ; he would
do all he could 10 bring capital TO her,
and make her blossom as garden of roses,
but such trusts and corporations as would
crush out all small dealers and give the
corporators complete control Of the mar
kcts he would forever oppose.
LEGAL vIEw.
Mr.. Jones. by way of preface, said be was
not interested III the pending question,
and intended to treat il merely IA legal
matter. He then gave running account
Of the introduction of the incorporating
measure, its passage. continuation accept
ance &c. The question that now met the
Senate was whether the repeal could be
made of any avail II the repeal could be
made legally he would be in favor of IT,
perhaps. The line Of authorities showed,
however. that such repeal was contrary to
law; therefore the bill before the body
would only throw the company into lltlga-
ton. Mr. Jones said he had looked into
the bill with some care before its passage,
and had seen nothing Objectionable in IT.
True very extraordinary longevity was
ryen il, but the senators representing
farming interests had raised no Objection
iot In regard to the charge that the act
would affect the agricultural interests he,
for one. did not think so.
Mr.. Blackstone said no member could
vote 10 repeal the bill and sustain his ac-
ton He had never seen anything wrong
IN the bill. but to repeal 1t he thought I'M
possible.
THE PATRON DEFENDS 1T.
Mr.. bovenstein, the patron of the origi-
nal bill, said be had introduced IN the regu-
lar way this measure, which was referred
10 committee. and after inquiry had been
made the bill was reported to the Senate
favorably. I'm the Senate IL was duly cor
sidered. read through, and passed. MIR.
IOvenstein thought 1t was wrong now to
take any action looking TO repecl.
Mr.. Rawlings said the incorporating bill
had been passed inadvertently. He did
not blame any senator for il. and up to
tins time he had never had an opportunity
20 explain his standing on the measure.
He favored the repeating act. His con-
stituents wantedit.
NO UNDUE HASTE.
Mr.. Heaton refuted the idea that the bill
had been passed inadvertently or with
undue haste, and he called for the reading
Of the record to support his assertion.
MIR. Sands believed with Mr.. Moore that
the Legislature had no right TO repeal the
act. To annul would be contrary TO the
Constitution of the United States, and
also the State of Virginia. II remedy is
sought il Is to be had III court of law.
Mr.. Woods, who might be termed the
humOTist of the Senate, SAID he was
Inflicted with the disease known as tho
rrip. and couldn't talk much, but when-
ever he did anything that he was sorry for
he tried to make reparation. Every man
here is sorry he passed thatbill. Let us do
our dntv here TO-DAY and repeal IL, AS to
what the courts would do that's none OF
our business. At the time the Senate was
irving TO repeal the bill 10y resolution the
Governor was signing his name 10 the IN
If they imgunfQr
the corporators) were anxious TO do right
they would have come TO the Senate and
ia i we don't want this bill If you don't
want Us 10 have IT.
Mr. Stubbs, chairman of the committee
o. which the bin was referred. said 1t had
heon maturely considered before the com;
uittee and in the Senate 1t had passed
without dissenting voice. What harm
could the original bill do? MIR. Stubs
could see none.
AoUEsIIoS OF Foley.
Mr. Gordon said the main point had
lceu overlooked that whether the Legs
la;urc OF Virginia gives "a charter or not
the American Tobacco Company already
had charter from New Jersey, and could
operate fully under that, and probably IL
would be best for ou- people TO keep the
industry in Virginia and have the head
quarters here, rather than let them SO to
New Jersey.
IHE CLOSING SPEECHES.
Mr.. Hurt said the act gave the American
Tobacco Company absolute control over
The markets Of the world. and whether tho
New Jersey law gave them power or not, be
was not in favor Of giving the act coonnte-
nance in Virginia. A blunder had been
made and il should be corrected. MIR;
Hurt confessed that the bill had passed
with his sanction and approval. but be had
n. i Of tha
about il. and ne had said that there was
nothing Objectionable in IL. and further
more that if the half century clause was
repugnant he and bis associates would
agree 10 reduce II TO fifteen years.
Mr. Berry said bis excuse Tor OBTAINING
the Senate a moment was that he repre-
sented purely a tobacco-growing section.
lie wac n,,t,osed ia the bull on the grounds