STOCK KILLED BY RAILROADS.
Mr. BUNDY returned Mr. Dobbin's Railroad bill [60], recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. DOBBINS complained of the report, and desired that the bill be referred to a select committee of three.
Mr. BUNDY. It was unconstitutional-adding a new provision to the railroad charters. As well might you require an individual, whose solvency is suspected, to file securities for his creditors.
Mr. VEATCH replied to Mr. Dobbins, and defended the action of the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew, supported the bill. Some railroads paid very well, for example, the Macttson and Indianapolis managed by the gentleman before me, [ Mr. Branham.]
Mr. BRANHAM. If the gentleman will allow me to say it: we have paid for two cows that are now living and in service. The Jeffersonville Road has paid for a mule twice which is still alive. [Laughter.]
Mr. SMITH supported the bill at length.
Mr. DOBBINS spoke again.
Mr. BRETT added considerations in favor of this or some other plan to quiet this well-grounded dissatisfaction of the people on account of the destruction of their property by railroads. If some remedy were not, proposed here, the people would take the matter into their own hands, and would make it much worse.
Mr. DAVIS. There was nothing so much demanded of this Legislature in his county as some means of redress on this account.
Mr. BINGHAM. Living on the line of the railroad, which the author of this bill desires principally to affect by it, it, was proper that he should state the reasons why he was obliged to oppose it. This stock-killing had been a matter of complaint for three or four years against the management of that road. None could be more willing than himself to unite with the gentleman in framing some bill that would afford ample relief. But he looked upon this bill as not only impracticable, but exceedingly inintical to the interests of the people themselves-as a proposition to compel insolvent companies to pay liabilities which they incur by the management of their roads. He gave examples. Individuals losing stock now can generally make some sort of compromise with the railroads ; but this bill proposes a second suit against the company on their bonds ; and it would operate as a direct mode of increasing litigations with the railroads.
Mr. Speaker ALLEN. [Mr. Sherman in the Chair.] Such was the intensity of the feeling in this matter, that if something is not done for the protection of the rights of citizens residing along the railroads, it will probably in some cases result in the injury and destruction of the lives of innocent persons. It was a just and reasonable consideration, that a corporation, able to pay $75,000 to $100,000 a year in salaries, could also do something for the payment of damages on account of property killed or destroyed by them. He thought that, though the souls and bodies of these corporations might escape responsibility for their destruction of property, still their assets might be reached. He, also, was in favor of a recommitment of the bill.
Mr. CAMERON demanded the previous question, and thereupon the bill was recommitted to Messrs. Dobbins, Brett and Bingham.
