Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-01-19

that railroads spattered blood from one
end OF their tracks 10 the other in order
to add to their Golfers. He denied that
corporations did not have souls. Rail-
roads should not be legislated against,
while all other corporations were ex-
cepted. When Mr.. Watkins brought up
the question OF harvest for the law
yers." Mr.. Saunders asked him II he was
not interested in a corporation-if he was
not an attorney for railroad? Mr.
Watkins replied that he was local at
torney, but every one knew that they
didn't amount to anything. lie was not
afraid of railroads, and the pass he car
ried in his pocket did not influence him
in the least.
PLEA FOR THE LAW.
Captain Parks spoke in favor of the
bill. The assertion that the measure was
a lawyers bilr' was an idea that he
secuted. The fact that two lawyers had
already opposed the measure would seem
to counterfeit this impression He was
in favor of the bill because he was OPP
posed to court-made laws. He wished the
statute clearly defined. He ridiculed the
idea that the pitiful salary OF $40 month
received by a brakeman compensated him
for all the risk he took, and II he was
hurled to death on account Of the negli-
gence of a conductor he was not entitled
to recover damages because he was amply
remunerated by the munifioent salary he
had drawn from the company. The poor
farmer had been hauled into the discus
sion. 1t was not the first time, he de-
clared, that railroad corporations had at
tempted TO ride on the farmers back. II
had been asserted that no railroad en-
ployees were asking for the enactment OF
a. tod D.
statement. RAILROAD employees in my
county have requested me to come here
and look after their interests, and 50
help me God. 1 intend TO do IT," de-
clared Captain Parks. This declaration
elected hearty applause both from the
floor Of the House and from the gale
ries.
SPEECH OF MR.. SAUNDERS.
Mr.. Saunders again spoke in favor OF
the measure. He was surprised that the
people should be so blinded TO their own
interests as 10 let their judgment be
turned and their minds diverted by the
many objections raised against a just
measure and which had no bearing on
the subject, but were merely used 10
drown reasonable argument. He asked
the gentleman 10 show him a single law
upon the statute books for the relief or
the farmers that had been placed there
through any effort or even acquiescence
Of the railroad corporations. He pointed
10 the law in regard TO the railway cross
ings, which was fought TO the bitter end
by the railroads, but which at last got
upon the statute books. He asked If the
railroads had ever shown any willingness
TO pay for the farmers stock killed on
their tracks. Their latest effort in that
direction was TO appear with counsel be-
fore a House committee and attempt to
defeat a bill which compelled them 10
pay the farmer for his loss thus sustain
ed The speaker challenged a denial OF
these facts. He was never afraid TO do
that which was right at the present Tor
fear that some future Legislature would
do wrong. When a brakeman went TO
his death through orders received from
his superior, though protesting even at
the danger into which he was forced, but
out of consideration for his wife and
children dared not refuse TO obey the
command; and then when this helpless
family asked the General Assembly 10
AFFORD them relief, they We're extended
the sympathy-"oh, yes, plenty OF sym
pathy." said Mr.. Saunders-but thew were
told that they couldn't enact a law 10
relieve them, because, perhaps. that would
out this line, continued Mr.. Saunders,
just vote against the law requiring rail-
roads to pay for the stock killed by them,
because that may perhaps also give some
lawyer a case. AS to unjust discrimina-
ton between the railroad corporation and
the private company, the Court Of APP
peals acknowledged that there was a diff
ference between the trust and the indi-
vidual enterprise, and that the former
should be treated differently because 1t
endangered the body polite. The Demo.
cratic platform had declared itself against
trusts, and this was a precedent. and it
was equally as just to include railroads
in this bill and except the private enter
prise.
When Mr. Saunders had gotten this
far in his argument he discontinued, IT
being then o'clock, and the House adj
journed.