Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1893-04-29
G0SSETT REPLIES
TO THE ATTACKS OF MR.. FAR
WELL AND SENATOR GARTER
He Says Theirs IL the Ola Claim that the
state Has No Right 60 Regulate
Corporations.


Hon. III II. Gossett IN answer 70 the
inquiry IL he had anything 10 say In ref
erencc TO the Farwell- Carter Land syndi-
cate controversy. replied. NO, i DO NOT
care 20 review the subject again; but l
am glad 20 see that these gentlemen
have come of their stills and now admit
that the state dealt with men III thr
capital contract, and not with an English
corporation. as seemed their effort TO
make the public believe
"Thpy pronounce your land corpora
ton bll The work Of a demagogue'
Yes. this Us not new nor strange.
There Is set of fellows thine servers
remarkable for their truculency TO HE
supposed interest Of capital that call
any man q dCmagogue who consistently
advocates the passage Of any law which
limits the field for corporate speculation.
This class Of men have but one measure
Of political virtue. and that Is how 20
make the most money with the LEAST
possible liability, aud that. too. without
reference TO he consequence TO future
generations"
"Glow about Mr. Carriers proposition
that the state can not make the capital
syndicate corporation sell It's lands With
in fifteen years or fifteen hundred
yeart"
"Wcn II senator Carter is right In
this contention | cant see why the law
Of which they complain should give these
gentlemen any concern and they are
making much ado about nothing But
Mr. Carter does his reputation as a
lawyer great injustice when be- insists
that Texas has not the right mud power
o. pass % law requiring land cornorntions
now owning real estate within limitation
30 DISPOSE Of the same within % reason
able time. The privilege Of holding land
by corporation Is franchise subject
nt ull times iu the viii of the state.
Tn hUlI tfkFfsetH tf.Htt1I WipluFn fIn
constitutional provision that no irrcyo-
cable ar ucuutrnlluhlp rruut of special
privileges or immuuities shall be made;
but all privileges aud franchises granted
by the Legislature are created under
&c. authority shall he subject 10 the con-
troll thereof" Art /. Soc II.
The authority cited boy Mr. Carter
to prove his coutcution. tu.wit lnl T. y.
'bS. not only fails to sustain his position.
hut b. remarkable for the fact That 10 b.
thr opinion of Mr.. Justice Harlan.
Reference is made 10 the laws Of Illinois
ON the subject Of thu right Of corpora
tiuus tp own luud Boo that state. We
learn from that opinion which cites the
statutes Of Illinois that a corporation In
that state may own so much land as its
corporate necessities require, aud that
"ull real estate acquired u satisfaction
~ any liabilities on Indebtedness and not
necessary aud suitable for the business
nunlly offered for sale ut public auction.
aud " no bid equal 90 the interest which
said corporation has in said real estate
rs made within i've years. II Va made the
duty uf the state tu enforce boy mfOrmu-
ton the sulo of such land IL will b. re-
m"mhrrcd that the law OF which these
gentlemen complain gives tile Capitol
syndicate und nl other corporntions
holding land contrary 10 is provisions,
fifteen years iu which 20 dispose uf the
same. Illinois is the state IN which
these Capitol syndicate owners live.
IL viii be- seen. therefore. how infinitely
moro liberal ON this subject is the law
Of Texas than the law Of Illinois aud
the comparison must certainly hC painful
Go these injured iunoccnts who presume
% lecture Texas upuu her public policy
" Mr. FurNcN proposes To reform This
country on the line indicated in his re-
cent memorial and letter. 10 viii ut once
hp seen that the field b. whining for
the harvest no his own door aud In
his own state.
Ills pnutulcs of criticism ON the rail-
road stock and bond bin ig as msplc-s
aud unjust us his objection to the law
regulating and limiting the ownership
of land hy corporations. MIR FArwcll
says Suppose business men iu Texas
who are, iu % sense, public servants iu
AN that they buy and sell. were required
Go make am expose of their business On
the state, how many Of them would
continue business iu the state of Tcxus|
The above b. O. rphnsh of the old con-
tpution that there IN mo- difference la
political status between uu individual
and railroad corporation. Railroads are
clothed hy the government with the tax
ing power and The power of eminent
domain, functions which an individual
iu private business eau under no orcum.
stances invoked, Aud to complain now
and compare this government superyi.
sion Of railroad corporations, which "
not only a right but duty, 10 the rights
of private citizens rs absolutely silly.
The question " not only long settled IN
Texas, but quite as firmly established iu
Illinois. PENNSYLVANIA aud other civilized
states ana countries. The policy OF both
the land corporation aud railroad stock
and bond blll is right, their provisions
conservative and just, and the enactment
Of such measures Ia the face of such OPP
position gives much promise of the per.
petuRtion of FREQ government, aud @
proof ~ the capacity of the people OF
Texas To- wisely legislutc independent
of the dictauon OF men who having full.
cd 90 control the public policy OF their
own state, In the interest Of corporate
cupidity, now presume 10 lecture Texas,
but negleCtS 10 tell the people that tho
laws of Texas are much less radical aud
strict than iu their own state,
aud that they are enjoying privileges in
| Texas that have been denied thcm in
| Illinois for more than twenty years"