The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1894-02-10
ElKTON AND SOUTHERN.
Amendment To the Bill Offered by Mr.
Bernard Carter.

Amendment to the Bill Offered by Mr..
Bernard Carter.
ANNAPOLIS. MD, Feb. 7.-Mr. Ber-
nard Carter representing the Pennsyl
vania Railroad Company, was before the
WAYS and means committee to oppose
the bill transferring $4,000 from the
Elkton and Middletown Road to the
Elkton and Southern Mr. Carter said
that the Pennsylvania Road has given
its consent to build road from Elk5on
in Cecil county, to Masseys in Kent
county. This road will traverse the
same territory covered By thu Elktoa
and Southern and serves the same pur
pose to the people of The s"u bern part
of Cecil county, wac are asking fer the
road. He saysthe road will be commenced
within five months and will be completed
and ready for operation by Angus l,
1896, unless delays occur IL obtaining
rights of way. Mr.. Carter offered d bill
which be desired the committee TO in
troduco as substitute fJr thu Ekson
and Southern bill, now under consider-
alton. This amenimeC, provides i"g the
new road, which is to % know Ii AS the
Elkton, Masseys aud Middletown Rel
road which is TO be built from some
point on the Philadelphia, Wilmington
and Baltimore Road at or near Elkton to
Masseys in Kent county, on the Kent
and Queen Anne's road. The sos. 600
held in the State treasury for the use of
the Elkton and MIddletown Road is not
to be paid to the Elkton, Massey's and
MIddletown Road until the last named
road is completed and read for operation.
Then the state is to receive 1880 shares
of the capital stock of the new road,
which is the amount represented by the
sos, 900 at $50 share. The Governor
of the State is authorized to name two
directors in the road and the remaining
stockholders to elect seven directors.
The bill also provides that there shall be
no forfeit of the State appropriation by
the Elkton, Massey's and Middletowr
for failure TO complete the road in
special time provided they use due
diligence in prosecuting the work.
In reply to question Mr.. Carter said
that he will not object to make the
board of public works the judges of
what is due diligence on the part of the
prosecutors of the work.
Mr.. James Alfred Pearce, OF Kent
county, appeared in opposition to the
Pennsylvania project and in favor of the
EIkton and Southern scheme. He said !
that he not only represented the people
of Cecil county, but of the whole East
ern Shore in preferring the Elkton and |
Southern Road. This project for the
first Time" said Mr.. Pearce, "gives
promise of a trunk line down the Mary |
land peninsula. To establish this trunk |
line it will only be necessary to build
from Chestertown to E ,ston, distance
of thirty-seven miles At Easton a
connection will be made with the Ralti- |
more aud Eastern Shore r ,ad. and thus
every county town on the E4stern Shore |
will be brought into close and convenient
intercourse This is not offered by the
Pennsylvania scheme"
Mr.. Carter interrupted and said that
to make the same connection the Penn.
sflvania will only have to build link of
eight miles, while by Mr.. Pearce's sug-
gestion visionary road of thirty-six
miles long will have to DO constructed.
Mr.. Fitzgerald asked if the Elkton
aud Southern will not have to operate in
connection with the Baltimore and Ohio
Roaus Mr.. Pearce said it will certainly
have to make alliances with some of the
larger systems and he will be glad to
have it connect with the Baltimore and
Ohio, which connection is contemplated
to be made at Childs Station, in Cecil
county.
At the request of MIR. Pearce further
consideration of the matter was post
poned until next Thursday.