AID TO RAILROADS.
The Committee on County and Township Business reported on the bill [H. R. 83] to repeal an act authorizing the people to vote aid to railroads, recommending indefnite postponement, for the reason that the people are fully competent to decide whether they will aid in the building of a railroad, and when they so desire should be allowed to do so.
Mr. KENNER said: I am in favor of this bill. I believe the day has come when it is wrong to vote a tax to put into the hands of corporations that which does not belong to the State or its inhabitants, and which afterward returns no substantial benefit to the givers of the money. There are a great many States that declare this thing unconstitutional. The State of Michigan never would permit a Township or County to vote a tax to build railroads. Take the result of this: We find that the men who pay the tax do not have control of the affair. I have seen it in all its hideousness in my own County, where a large portion of the voting population pay no taxes, and those owning property are overwhelmed by this class of persons at the ballot. What is the result of it? You will to-day vote aid to build a road, and in three months from to-day some large corporation comes along and snaps it up; so where is the competition if two or three roads run through a town and all are owned by one corporation? I say the day has passed for voting aid to railroads. In the earlier days it was necessary to develop the country, but that day has passed. The people ought not to be forced to build and give to other corporations of this kind I am in in favor of passing this bill and voting down the report.
Mr. EDWINS--I am somewhat interested in this bill, as we are going to have a trial on this very subject on the 13th of this present month. We are now suffering from the effects of just such a tax as this in my County, levied some years back for the building of the White Pigeon Railroad--not levied by a vote of the real tax-payers, but by the vote of irresponsible parties who never pay a dollar of taxes themselves, but who are always ready to put their hands in their neighbors' pockets and vote away their property. You are all aware to what extent corruption has crept into our elections, and how a few thousand dollars can control our elections. They can very readily spend $5,000 for the purpose of $25,000 or $28,000 voted in aid of their road. I am not opposed to railroad; I am their friend, but I want those who get the benefit of them to build them. After we give them our money, in the shape of taxes, they charge us the same rates for transporting our hogs, grain and other marketable produce as if we had never paid them one cent. And again, the Companies who start to build those roads never complete them, but sell them to a wealthier Company, and so on, until they finally land in the hands of Jay Gould, who eventually gets the benefit of our taxes. I move to lay the report of the Committee on the table, read the bill a third time and place it on its passage.
Mr. FRAZER--I am one of those who believe the American people are smart enough to take care of themselves and am sick of this baby talk about imposing upon the majority of the people. I know the gentleman from Huntington (Mr. Kenner) is interested in the law--he wants it repealed. Those sections which have voted aid to railroad building, if they had the opportunity, would not take their money back and give up the road. Their are Counties in Indiana which have very few roads, and they would gladly vote aid to the construction of a, railroad. In Crawfordsville they voted by the voice of a majority to give aid to a road, because they want a live road running east and west which would give them competition. As the law stands now, if a majority of the voting population desire a railroad they have the right to do so. I think the law should not be repealed.
Mr. THOMPSON said if there was one thing upon which he was instructed it was for the repeal of this law allowing Townships and Counties to vote aid to railroads. The instructions of the Democratic as well as the Republican candidates were the same in this respect. He considered the voting of aid in his County to railroads is, and always has been, wrong. The taxes voted to aid railroads, gravel roads, and the various taxes authorized by the Legislature, altogether amounts to a large amount. He wanted this law repealed, and felt satisfied that a majority of the people, in the adoption of the Constitutional Amendments, would be opposed to this subsidy to railroads.
Mr. ROBERTS was opposed to the repealing of this law. Because Elkhart and other Counties have plenty of railroads that is no reason why the other Counties of the State, having no railroads, should be deprived of the privilege of aiding such construction.
Mr. BARTLETT said: There is a great deal of difference between voting money to railroads and turnpikes. Money invested in a wagon road is beneficial to everybody, but money voted to railroads, as soon as the road is built it is absorbed by a new Company and they become bankrupt. I do not think we ought to vote one farthing in this way.
Mr. GILMAN was in favor of the bill. In his section of the country they were voting money to aid a railroad now, thus compelling a man to pay a tax whether he wants to or not. He hoped the report would be tabled and the bill put upon its passage.
Mr. MOODY--I hope this bill will pass. I am not opposed to the building of railroads, or the building of any public enterprises, but I am opposed to taxation without representation, and the present law authorizing the voting of a tax to aid in the building of railroads is a law authorizing taxation without representation in its worst form. Persons who are subjects of other countries and who own propertyin these Townships proposed to be taxed; people who reside in other States, Counties or Township, and who have property here; widows, married women and orphan children have no voice in voting this tax, and yet this law, if not repealed, proposes to tax their property against their will and give it to a private enterprise. I think this law a bad one in principle and should be repealed.
