The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-03-17
roRcING IRIS HAND.

/ In the opinion OF the Norfolk Land
4 mark "the movement forcing the hand
of the Richmond Fredericksburg and
Potomac Railroad was eminently just
4 and wise" But why? The road Is
acting under charter granted by the
State and is in an especial sense un-
\ der the protection of the State. 1t
has been operated under this charter
for a long periods Of years and it has
given splendid service TO the state and
its people and their Industrial and
commercial interests. 1t has not
sought to do anything that the
state has not permitted 1t to do. 1t
has admitted its readiness to make a
now agreement with tho State If the
State would permit 1t to come In as a
taxpayer on tho same terms as the
other railroads operating In the state.
1t has. asked for no special privileges,
but only that 1t shall receive the
same treatment as the other roads.
That seems to be fair; but tho State
acting through its Legislative body
and in obedience to public clamor, has
sought to force the company to aban-
don certain rights which are guaran-
teed to it by tho State, without any
compensatory benefits from the State.
1t has done what any business man
or company would have done in the
like circumstances, and. standing
squarcly on its rights as a creature of
the State, and as these rights are Sc
cured to it by Its charter from the
State. there was no reason either in
any effort should have been made to
Dragon it into accepting a settle
ment which might have been disas-
trous to it's interests and OF no ma
tcrial advantage to the State. It
may be. as the Landmark predicts,
| that tho road will come in as tax
payer: but it ought not to come in
\ except on equitable terms. We do not
believe that the Sunday bill
will hold in law. We do not
believe that the courts would hold
for a moment that what could not be
accomplished by fair dealing can be
& compelled by force or by a policy
which is in its nature conhscatory.
q There is another point made by our
tidewater contemporary which is not
creditablc to it. and is so stirling and
selfish. in fact, tllatzit will not con-
vince the sober second thought of
the Landmark itself. If the Road do
| not come in as a taxpayer, says our
friend I'VE can stand the diversion
of traffic to Norfolk, and the State OF
| Virginia ought not to care a rap
| which way the traffic goes, provided
her own cities and counties get the
handling of it. as they will under
either agreement" But che State of
! Virginia ought to care good many
raps about any effort that would re-
suit In injury not only to great
transportation line, but to the State
itself, which has a property interest
in the line that is to be crushed be-
cause it will not sacrifice the rights
which 1t holds under the great seal
of the Commonwealth. The diversion
of the traffic which finds its natural
way over the Richmond, Fredericks-
burg ard Potomac Railroad through
Norfolk would not help the town Of
Richmond or result in the slightest
benefit to the state as whole. The
State would not make any more mon
cy by such diversion except by in-
creasing tho assessment Of the roads
which would then do the business now
handled by the Richmond, Fredcrcks-
burg and Potomac road. ItSmight be
found also that Just to the extent that
Norfolk would benefit by the policy
which the Landmark predicts" would
that town be expected to pay larger
sums into the treasury of the State
We suppose the other roads which
would be benefited by the sacrifice OF
the Richmond, Fredericksburg and lao-
tomac road would not desire. this poll
/ ICY. against which also the taxpayers
/ OF Norfolk would doubtless protest.
| #5 34s4 -----------------