ADDRESS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 ^^ i^ E s I ID E isr T 
 
 OF THE 
 
 0a, €mM lailruair ^a,, 
 
 TO THE 
 
 STOCKHOLDERS, 
 
 ON THE 
 
 « 
 
 SUBJECT OF WITHDRAWAL OF THE MATLg 
 
 BY tITe 
 
 POSTMASTER GENERAL. 
 
 RICHMOND: 
 
 MACFARLANE & FRRGrssON, PRINTERS 
 
 1864.- 
 
ADDRESS 
 
 or THE 
 
 iPi^ESiiDEinsra? 
 
 OP THE 
 
 . Central %mhii C0., 
 
 TO THE 
 
 STOCKHOLDERS, 
 
 ON THE 
 
 SUBJECT OF WITHDRAWAL OF THE MAILS 
 
 • 
 
 i\ BY THE 
 
 POSTMASTER GENERAL. 
 
 RICHMOND: 
 
 MACFARLANE & FEROUSSON, PRINTERg, 
 
 1864, 
 
Digitized by tine Internet Arciiive 
 in 2011 witin funding from 
 Dul<e University Libraries 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/addressofpresideOOfont 
 
ADDRESS 
 
 To the Stockholders of the 
 
 Virginia Central Railroad. 
 Gentlemen, — You are aware that by the order of the Postmaster 
 General, the mail was withdrawn from jour road on the 11th day of 
 August, and withheld from it until the 6th instant. At your next an- 
 nual meeting it would have been my duty to lay before you in the an- 
 nual report of the Board, all the facts connected with the interruption 
 of the mail, and to that period I would have deferred my report of the 
 case, if the Postmaster General had not thought proper to publish a 
 pamphlet copy of our correspondence, from which, by some accident, 
 my reply to his letter of the 1st of August was omitted. That publi- 
 cation makes it my duty to lay before you the whole correspondence in 
 anticipation of the annual meeting in November next, in order that 
 you may be possessed of all the facts of the case. 
 
 A controversy has just been closed with the Postmaster General in 
 reference to the character of the contract which should be signed for 
 the transportation of the mails, the importance of which, not only to 
 this company and the railroad interest of the Confederacy, but to the 
 people of the Confederate States, as it involved an important principle 
 of free government, has not been properly appreciated. 
 
 You know of the general fact that after an experience of a contract 
 of two years, ending July 1st, 1863, during which they learned the con- 
 struction the Postmaster gave to the extent of his power under that con- 
 tract, the Board were unwilling to renew it without modification, though 
 continuing to carry the mails, but you do not know the reasons which 
 influenced them. It is proper that you should know why, after all the 
 excitement growing out of the Postmaster General removing the mails 
 from the road, the Board of Directors unanimously passed a resolution 
 approving the course of the President in refusing to sign the contract 
 without proper modifications, that several other Virginia railroad Presi- 
 dents had refused to sign it, and that, of those who had signed, some, 
 if not all, had obtained verbal satisfaction on points of objection. 
 
 Reasons for not SiONiNa Contract wiTnouT Modification. 
 
 In May 1861, a contract was proposed extending to June 30, 1863. 
 The provisions were found to be a literal transcript from that of the U. 
 
S. Grovernment, and as no difficulty had ever arisen with that Govern- 
 ment, none was to be expected with this. It was reasonable to expect 
 that as the provisions were cojyied, the practice under them would he 
 the smne, but it was not long before we found ourselves much disap- 
 pointed. We found that powers which might have been claimed, but 
 had lain dormant under the old Government, were exercised \xp to the 
 full letter of the contract, and the practice was changed in a very im- 
 portant particular relating to the enforcement of fines, in violation of 
 principles which we supposed were established in all proceedings, both 
 civil and criminal, where pains and penalties of any kind were involved, 
 viz : that any supposed delinquent should be notified of the charge 
 ac'ainst him, and heard before condemnation. 
 
 1st. The rule invariably observed with the U. S. Postoffice Depart- 
 ment, when a contractor was reported as a del'.nquent, was to notify him 
 promptly the precise nature of the charge, time and place being men- 
 tioned, and calling for an explanation. Our Postmaster General abol- 
 ished that eminently just and proper rule, and refused to give notice. 
 In the commencement of the first contract our mail pay was deducted 
 and we do not know to this day for what it was done, as I am informed 
 by our Treasurer. lie slightly modified his first practice on that sub- 
 ject. He explained at the end of a quarter, or any later period, when 
 a settlement is being made, the character of the fine, but still omits the 
 material requirement of justice, notice at the time the charge is made, 
 that the party may have a fair opportunity to release himself .from the 
 payment of the fine. 
 
 The violation of the principles of justice in his modified rule requires 
 but little comment. It is not unlike the case of a man sentenced to 
 death, who never heard of any charge against him until th« day of his 
 execution. 
 
 2d. Although the whole compensation this company would receive 
 per annum for carrying the mails between Richmond and Jackson's 
 Kiver, would be a mere pittance in existing circumstances, and virtu- 
 ally the company is rendering the service from patriotic considerations, 
 he had deducted from their pay for every day the mail is not actually 
 carried, no matter by what cause prevented, whether the presence of 
 the public enemy or the necessary appropriation of our trains by mili- 
 tary authority to some urgent purpose of public defence. I had sup- 
 posed that it was universally conceded that penalties would not attach 
 to the non-fulfillment of any contract, if the failure was caused by the 
 act of God, or the public enemy. It seems to me that exemption from 
 fines where there was a necessary interference of our own military au- 
 thorities ought to be regarded a stronger case than that of the public 
 
enemy; the latter we might resist if we could, but it would not only be 
 unavailing to attciiijit to resist our own military authorities, but it would 
 be unlawful and unpatriotic to do so. 
 
 The pecuniary value of these fines and deductions was not the most 
 important consideration in this controversy — it was a principle which 
 called for resistance of authority improperly exercised, although it was 
 done -with good motives. 
 
 3d. Another source of dissatisfaction was his refusal to allow the 
 apartment of the mail car to be subjected to such supervision and police 
 as would protect the company from unauthorised transportation of arti- 
 cles of freight in that apartment. No one disputes the propriety of 
 the mail car bding kept free from the admission of promiscuous travel; 
 but when a large apartment of a car is assigned to the use of the Post- 
 Biaster General, it should not be used by his agent for any other pur- 
 pose except the transportation of the mails. It was not only reasona- 
 ble to apprcliritd that in these days of demoralization and speculation, 
 there might "be some articles unlawfully carried in the mail apartment, 
 if there was no right reserved to enter and inspect it, hut tJie fact has 
 occurred on tJiin road. Great abuses have been practised not only on 
 this road, but, I learn, on many others, and the right was asked for 
 each one of the Directors to enter and inspect this apartment to see 
 that nothing improper was carried in it; this was refused. This road 
 is peculiarly subjected to the danger of having packages smuggled into 
 this car. For f-everal months of the year, the car is necessarily out on 
 the track at Staunton before light, and arrives at Richmond after dark, 
 thus giving a tempting opportunity for smuggling. I believe most of 
 the route agents are honest, trustworthy gentlemen, but it is not proper, 
 nor is it the custom, to. expose the interests of a railroad company with 
 no other security but the supposed integrity of an officer. We take 
 bonds and security to ensure fidelity from men of the highest charac- 
 ter. The Postmaster General puts whomsoever he chooses in the 
 place of route agent. He is liable to be imposed upon, and to 
 get a scoundrel on our cars. Is it not the dnii/ of the President to 
 throw all Ihe guards he can around the company's interests ? I am in- 
 formed by the Superintendent that barrels of flour have been carried in 
 the mail apartii.ent. It has been but a short time since one of his 
 agents, after defrauding a number of persons about Staunton, went off 
 with the enemy. 
 
 Why should objection be made to the supervision of this apartmen* 
 by the Directors ? I asked this right to protect the intc7-ests of the 
 compatiiy. I asked it before any controversy had arisen, as will be seen 
 by the following copy of a letter on the subject, and for that purpose: 
 
e 
 
 " Va. Central Railroad, Presidknt'b Office. 1 
 '• Beavcrdam. July 3d, ISOl. f 
 "Hon. J H. Rbagan, P. 3/. G«ncraZ; 
 
 "Dear Sir, — As this conipany is continuing to cnrry the mail withom hav- 
 ing made any contract, to prevent miscoiisiruclionj I vvnie to say tliat I can- 
 not fonseiit to a lenewa' of some of its cdnditions. 
 
 '• Bc:'ides objections t(i the unprecedented rigour in demandiftfe a liieral 
 compliiince with the terins of the eoniract. I cannot consent that Hny onp 
 shall l>e authorized to o<-cnpy a larjie apairment in our cars and the chihl ciffi- 
 cers "f the company not be HJIowed to enter it when it is possiblt that ii may be 
 uted to the great prejudice of its inlerexis. \ 
 
 '•Very respectfully, 
 '■ (Si-ned.) E. FONTAINE, Pn-.^.V..,/. « \ 
 
 It \v;is urged that the law requires the exclusion of all but su in of- 
 ficers ; the. Postruaster General was estopped from taking this ii'duud 
 by hav'in<4 in his letter of llth of April conceded that the Prc^i'K'nta 
 and Superintendents of railroads "might tkavel in the maii, cab. 
 when they wished," and, furthermore, that the interests of the company 
 do n-f^uire some protection in the premises. 
 
 In his letter of April llth, 18t^4, he says his first rule of total ex- 
 clusion had been so far modified " as to allow the Presidents and Super- 
 intendents of railroads to travel in the mail cars when they wished to 
 do so, and thai conductors should at all times be allowed to pass tlirough 
 and examine the mail cars to prevent any thing improper from being 
 carried in them " I contended that as there was no legal impediment 
 to the admission of the Directors; as they were the chosen guardians 
 of the interests of the Stockholders, they ought at least to participate 
 in njakiiig this inspection of the mail car. The President and Super- 
 intendent rarely travel over the whole road, and even if the Directors 
 were added, there would be still but an imperfect supervision. I am 
 gratified to be able to say that our conductors aTe gentlemen of excel- 
 lent chaiacter as I believe; but is it proper that they sli^uld supercede 
 the Directors in their appropriate duties? The conductors have a very 
 constant task in attending to other duties, especially at all points wliere 
 the trains stop : and it seems that they have not been able to prevent 
 eren barrels of flour from being taken on the mail car. The facility of 
 concealing freight under mail bags may readily be understood as likely 
 to bafile any ordinary vigilance, if the mail agent should be dishonest. 
 ' I therefore wanted the additional guard of an occasional and unexpect- 
 ed visit from a Director who, it was to be presumed, would have less 
 hesitation in exposing any impropriety than the conductors. I have 
 been willing at all times, if required, to limit the admission of Direc- 
 tors to one at a time in the mail apartment. 
 
 The foregoing objections to signing the contract were disclosed in the 
 progress of the first term ot two years, by actual experience. ^J'he sub- 
 
sequent discussion of these three points brought to our notice other 
 objections which might be practically felt during the present term, now 
 nearly three years to run. 
 
 It is proper to say that in the progress of this controversy I had the 
 Valuable aid and co-operation of Peter V. Daniel, Esq., President of the 
 Eichmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac Company, in effecting a satis- 
 factory modification of the contract, to which he entertained all my ob- 
 jections. « 
 
 4th. The contract required the company to fit up at their own ex- 
 pense a mail apartment ''for the exclusive use of the Department and 
 its ag3nt, to the satisfaction of the Postmaster General or his author- 
 ized agent," with no limitation as to the extent of space or cost of 
 equipment, except his discretion. This has been modified. 
 
 5th. The sixth article declared "that the company shall be subject 
 to fine," for several enumerated failures; and here again there was no 
 expressed limitation of the amount of fines which might be imposed. 
 
 6th. The company was liable to the forfeiture of its contract, and the 
 consequent withdrawal of the mails with its attendant responsibilities, 
 if it disoheyed any of ^Hlie instructions of the Department without any 
 qualification or condition annexed," as to the character of those in- 
 structions. 
 
 Concessions Obtained. 
 
 When wc announce the several modifications of the contract which 
 have been conceded, we do not wish to be understood as claiming any 
 triumph over the Postmaster General in effecting these concessions, and 
 desire to show you that we have not been actuated by a spirit of oppo- 
 sition to him, but that we have been aiming to accomplish a practical 
 benefit for you and the community; and we cheerfully admit that he 
 has made the several changes in th^ contract under a commendable 
 sense of duty, resulting from the consideration of the subject induced 
 by the discussions which have taken place. 
 
 1st. Eailroad companies are to have written notice when reports are 
 made subjecting them to fines. 
 
 2d. Besides the ofiicers formerly admitted into the mail cars, any other 
 officer may be, who is named, for the purpose of police and inspection. 
 
 3d. Deductions of pay for not performing a trip are made subject 
 to specified conditions. 
 
 4th. Fines for the several failures enumerated in Article VI. of the 
 old contract, are not left to the discretion of the Postmaster, but are 
 made a subject of agreement in the modified contract. 
 
 5th. The instructions which now subject the railroad company to 
 
forfeiture of contract if not obeyed must be sbown to be made in con- 
 formity with the Postoffice law and the contract. 
 
 None could have regretted the annoyance and inconvenience result- 
 ing from the interruption of the mail more than the President and Di- 
 rectors, and they did all in their power to mitigate them by a pub-' 
 lie offer, a copy of which is herewith printed, to carry, witliout cliargey\ 
 all newspapers and pre-paid letters, and did carry them.* 
 
 I am happy, however, in reporting the favorable termination of the 
 unpleasant controversy, restoring the public accommodation, and pre- 
 serving the rights of the company by a return ©f the mail on the terms 
 above mentioned. 
 
 That the Hon. Postmaster General believed he was doing right in 
 what he did, I will not deny, because I am not disposed to question his 
 probity o-r his patriotism, but I feel that I may say with all proper re- 
 epect to him, that the facts and the conclusion show that he was in er- 
 ror, and that the President and Directors could not have acted other- 
 wise in their view of the subject^ if they faithfully represented you and 
 respected themselves. 
 
 I have only now to ask that you will read the corrected copy of the 
 correspondence that you may see in what manner I attempted to dis- 
 charge my duty in the premises; which, I will add, has been far from 
 being a pleasant one. KespectfuUy, 
 
 E. FONTAINE, Pres't. 
 On hehalf of the Board of Directors. 
 
 OiTicE Va. Centrai/ Railuoad Co., 
 RicUmond, Sept. 7, 1864. 
 
 * Mails on the Va. Central Railroad. — An advertisement of the Postmas- 
 ter General, in the Sentinel and Dixpatrh, is calculated to produce the impres- 
 sion that this company has refused to»carry the mails. So far Jroni this being 
 the fact, he has rtfnsed to allow the company to carry them. The company has 
 carried the maiis for more, than twelve months without complaint from him 
 or any one else, so far as I know. He has refused to pay anything for this 
 service. Nevertheless, he has been inlormed that the company would still 
 continue to carry them, being willing to take the risk of not having juitice 
 done them at some future time. 
 
 To alleviate so far as practicable the serious public inconvenience from this 
 unreasonable and extraordinary course of the Postmaster, notice is hereby 
 given, that the company will receive letters and papers at their office in this 
 city, and have them deliveretl, wiihout charge, at any postoffice on the line of 
 their road. Letters wiil be received in tlie country by the depot agents at the 
 different stations on the road. All those directed to Riclimond or points beyond 
 will be put in the Richmond office. A box for receiving letters will be kept 
 in the Superintendent's office, which is open generally from 9 A. M. to 9 P. 
 M. Newspapers may be sent without postage, but letters must be pre paid. 
 
 E. FONTAINE, President. 
 
 OJJice Va. Central Jtailroad Company, Richmond, Aug. 13, 18G4. 
 
COREESPOI^DENCE. 
 
 Virginia Central Railroad, 
 PresidenVs Office, Beaverdam, Va., July 3, 1863. 
 
 Dear Sir, — As this company is continuing to carry the mail -without 
 having made any contract, to prevent misconstruction, I write to say that 
 I cannot consent to a renewal of some of its conditions. 
 
 Besides objections to the unprecedented rigor in demanding a literal com- 
 pliance with the terms of the contract, I cannot consent that any one shall 
 be authorized to occupy a large apartment in one of our cars, and the chief 
 officers of the company not be allowed to enter it, when it is possible that 
 it may be used to the great prejudice of its interests. 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 Bon. J. H. Reagan, P. M. General. 
 
 E. FONTAINE, President. 
 
 PosTorncE Departmext, 
 
 Richmond, July 8, 18G3. 
 
 Sir, Your letter of the 3d instant is received, in which you say you can- 
 not consent to a renewal of some of the conditions on which your company 
 catrl?? -.hc mails. You say, " besides objections to the unprecedented 
 ri;r ~ ir. d.^n^anding a literal compliance with the terms of the contract, I 
 cannot consent that any one shall be authorized to occupy a large apart- 
 ment in one of our cars, and the chief officers of the company not be allow- 
 ed to enter it, when it is possible that it may be used to the great prejudice 
 of its interests." 
 
 I hope, by a proper understanding, your objections to a renewal of your 
 contract with the department may be obviated. 
 
 On the first point, I have to say that the performance of the mail service 
 and uf my duties connected with it, are regulated by law. Where the ser- 
 vice is performed according to contract, the contractor is necessarily paid 
 the full contract price for ^le service. Wliere the contractors fail to per- 
 ferm the service, I am required by law to make proper deductions from 
 their pay. Such deductions are made upon fixed and reasonable rules ; 
 and if tliese should in any case be so misapplied as to work injustice -to a 
 contractor, a representation of the facts to the department would cause a 
 prompt correction of the error. It is on these principles that I have en- 
 deavored to act; and while it has been my object to exact in behalf of the 
 public a faithful performance of duty by contractors for carrying the 
 mails, I have been equally careful to avoid unreasonable or unlawful ex- 
 actions. And I have uniformly consulted the railroad companies with 
 which we have contracts, as to schedules, and had special reference to 
 their wishes in fixing them, so as to avoid injury to their interests as far as 
 possible. 
 
 On the other point made in your lefier, 1 would say that it was found 
 that in some instances railroad conductors were making use of the mail 
 cars as their offices, and as a consequence, taking their friends and ae- 
 
10 
 
 qaaintances into the mail cars at pleasure. This produced serious cdm- 
 piaints from route agents, and tn a greater or less extent endangered the 
 security of the mails. It was this •which gave rise to the order to exclude 
 all persons from the mail cars excppt the sworn agents of the department, 
 er^thojip having its permission. Cases have been brought to my knowledge 
 in which the pre^iidents and superintendents of railroads have complained 
 of the rule, on the ground of its exclusion of them from the mail cars, as 
 well as on the ground you mention, of the necessity for the companies to 
 have the power of police over the mail cars, as well as others, to guard 
 •gainst abuse by the transportation of other than mail -matter. In these 
 cases I have directed that the presidents and superintendents of railroads 
 should be allowed, when they wished, to travv^l in the mail cars, and that 
 conductors should in all cases be allowed to pass through and examine the 
 mail cars, to prevent any thing improper from being carried in them. I 
 did not know but that this had bten made known to you, and will have in- 
 structions to this eflfect sent to the route agpiits on your road. 
 
 I trust that these suggestions will obviate your objections to renewing 
 your contract. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 JOIIN II. REAGAN, P. M. General. 
 E. Fontaine, Esq., Fres. Va. Central R. R. Co. 
 
 PosTOFFicE Department, 
 Inspection Office, Richmond, July 8, 1863. 
 
 Sir, — The postmaster general has so far modified my order of September 
 3, 1862, as to allow the president and superintendent of the Virginia Cen- 
 tral railroad to travel in the mail cars, should they desire to do so. And, 
 as that order was never intended to affect the right of the conductors to 
 enter ana inspect the mail cars, so as to prevent the transportation of im- 
 proper articles in them, you will of course offer no opposition to their en- 
 trance for this purpose. You will not, however, submit to any claim by 
 conductors to use your apartment for the transaction of their own business, 
 or that of the company. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 B. FULLER, Chief Clerk P. 0. D. 
 G. G. Gooch, Esq., Route Agent, Richmond, Va. 
 
 Copies of the above sent on same date to T. J. Edwards, E. J. Swift and 
 W. H. Haas, route agents. 
 
 Virginij^ Central Railroad, 
 President's Office, Richmond, Va., April 9, 1864. 
 
 Dear SiR.^On the 3d of July last I apprised you that the contract with 
 the department contained certain conditions to which I was not willing to 
 be bound by signing, but would continue to carry the mails, on the same 
 terms of course;, until changed by agreement as to compensation. 
 
 The treasurer of this company informs me that you declined paying for 
 service rendered, as he understood, on the ground that the contract was not 
 signed, thereby subjecting the company to the objectionable features. 
 
 There are three oty'ections to the contract: 1st, the right claimed to fine 
 for some delinquenc}', without stating what it is and where it occurred ; 
 2d, the exclusion of the officers of the company from the mail car ; and 
 3d, the exaction of fines for not carrying the mails,, though prevented by 
 military authority from doing it. 
 
 Your letter was received, saying that one of these obligations would net 
 
11 
 
 be enforced ; and whilst I do not impua;n the sincerity of your promise, yet 
 ii does not comport with my views of propriety in a business transaction, 
 to become bound, in writing, to a condition objected to, relying on the 
 promise of forliearance in requiring compliance. 
 
 Be good enough to inform me whetlier you insist on having the contract 
 signed without modification, as a p erequisite to payment for service 
 rendered. If your sense of duty under the law should c-mpel you to 
 take that course, I suppose I can only obtain compensation by an act ot 
 congress. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 Hon. J. H. Reagan, P. M. General. 
 
 E. FONTAINE, PresidetU. 
 
 PosTomcE Department, 
 
 liichmond, April 11, 1864. 
 
 Sir. — Your letter of the 9th instant is received, in which yuu say, 
 " There are three objections to the contract : 1st, the right claimed to fine 
 for Some deli-nquenoy, without stating what it is and when it occurred; 
 second, the exclusion of the officers of the company from the mail car ; and 
 third, the exaction of fines for not carrying the mails, though prevented by 
 military authority from doing it." 
 
 In answer to your first objection, I have to say that whenever fines and 
 deductions are nmde from the pay of a contractor for failures to perform 
 service, they are notified, when the settlement of the service for the 
 quarter is made, of the amount of such fines or deductions, the dates of all 
 failures, and the places at which such failures were made; and this has 
 been the established and uniform rule of the department since the 3d cf 
 March, 18G3. 
 
 Ill answer to your second objection, I have to say that in my letter to 
 you of July 8th, 1863, you were informed that the rule excluding all per- 
 sons from the mail cars, had been so far modified, and corresponding direc- 
 tions given to our agents on all railroads, as to allow the presidents and 
 eupcrintendents of railroads to, travel in the mail cars when they wished to 
 do so, and that conductors should at all times be allowed to pass through 
 and examine the mail cars, to prevent any thing improper from being con- 
 veyed in them. 
 
 There exists, therefore, no ground in fact for these tw o objections, unless 
 you desire the substance of these instructions inserted in the contract with 
 your company, to which there is no oljection by this department 
 
 In answer to your third objection, 1 have to say that this department 
 undertakes to pay a sum agreed upon, for an amount of service agreed on, 
 to be performed in a manner and by a schedule agreed on. You make no 
 complaint of the failure or unwillingness of the department to pay for all 
 the service you perform for it. But you do object to entering into a con- 
 tract with it, because it will not agree to pay you for what you do not 
 do. This I could not do under the law if I would. If you are damaged 
 by the orders of the war department interfering with your schedules, that 
 department, and not this, is responsible for such damage. The expenses 
 of this department are, by the requirements of the constitution, to be 
 paid out of its own revenues. Congress can give it no assistance from the 
 general treasurj'. Nor can the other departments contribute any means 
 to aid in defraying its expenses. In this respect it stands alone. And 
 •while it is confidently believed it will be able to pay all its own just lia- 
 bilities, it might not be able to pay such damages as might result from tha 
 
12 
 
 orders of other departments, and cannot in reason be expected to do so in 
 any case. 
 
 We cannot expect to carry on tlie postal service successfully, and have 
 no right to attempt it in any other way than that prescribed by lavr. The 
 law requires the making of contracts for conveying the mails, and forbids 
 the payment for such service without contracts. 
 
 Very respectfully, ♦ 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 JOHN U. IIEAGAN, P. M. General. 
 E. Fontaine, Esq., Pres. Va. Central H. R. Co. 
 
 Richmond, April 15, 1864; 
 
 Dear Sir, — Your letter of the 11th instant meets pai-tially one of my 
 objections to signing the contract, viz: that right which is claimed to ex- 
 clude the officers of the company from the mail car. You are willing to 
 provide for admitting the president and superintendent. Is there not the 
 same reason for embracing the directors? I am aware of the impropriety 
 of tlie mail car being occupied by passengers indiscriminately. Do you 
 think that a discretion on this sul>ject is more safely trusted with one of 
 your route a2;ents than with the president of one of our railroads? 
 
 The practice of your department on the subject of fines conveys an in- 
 sinuation against the honesty of a railroad president. Do you really 
 think tiiat a prominent officer of a railroad company would deliberately 
 make a false statement to get rid of a fine of a few dollars ? I never ex- 
 pected that the administration of one of our departments of government 
 would compare unfavorably with tlie rejected, and now deservedly detested 
 one of the old Union. Why reverse the rule of enlightened, civilized and 
 christian law, and presume every man dishonest? If this is not to be the 
 case, I can see no good reason for departing from the practice of the old 
 government, and inform the contractor that you propose to fine him for 
 some supposed delinquency, unless he can give a sufficient excuse. Then 
 he might explain it ; but at the end of a quarter or later", he probably 
 would have lost a knowledge of the facts of the case. Your rule is calcu- 
 lated to work injustice, and acquiescence in it by the contractor would 
 seem to be a concession that the department may not expect the truth from 
 any one. 
 
 Your subordinate agent of the postoffice department will admit whom he 
 chooses in the mail car. I say unll, because you can't preven-t it, and yet 
 you reflect on the directors of a railroad company, by refusing them ad- 
 mission, r^nd cannot trust the discretion of the president or superintendent 
 to say who may, under extraordinary circumstances, be admitted. 
 
 I think there is good ground for these two objections, after your partial 
 modification. 
 
 In relation to the 3d, your argument is, that as we agree to perform a 
 specified service, if we fail in any part of it, no matter for what cause, 
 whether by our fault or not, we must lie fined. We fit up mail cars at 
 considerable expense. We appropriate them to the acuomuKjdation of the 
 mails. We agree, for a very sinall sum, to carry them lor a year. You 
 can hardly be ignorant that if the same car was* appropriated to any other 
 transportation, it would pay a much larger sum. We are always ready to 
 perfiirrii the promised service; but a power we cannot resist — and patriot- 
 ism forbids that we should resist if we could — prevents us from carrying 
 the mail, and yet you inflict a penalty on the railroad company as a de- 
 faulter, when it was ready and willing to perform the required service but 
 for the interposition of a superior power, under circumstances of public 
 
18 
 
 necessity afFecting the safety of the very government of which you are a 
 part, and which it is your duty to protect. 
 
 Your argument is, " that we must not expect compensation for what 
 we do not do." On this assumption, if you failed to give us any mails 
 to carry on any day, though we ran the usual car empty over our whole 
 route, we must he fined, because we carried no mails, though it was from 
 your own default, and our expenses were precisely the same as if we had 
 carried it. 
 
 It is a mockery to refer us to the war department to compensate us for 
 your fines for obeying their order, when that department has no funds 
 which it can thua appropriate. 
 
 You have refused, as I understand you, to pay this company for services' 
 actually rendered, because I have declined to subject the company to sooie 
 very obnoxious conditions. If the services are rendered, is there not a 
 moral obligation to pay for them? The immoral government of the old 
 Union never refused payment because there was not a written contract to 
 compel. But you say that the law forbids paying for such services without 
 contracts. 
 
 IIow is it that other railroad companies have been paid without signing 
 contracts ? I understand this to be the fact. My objections I know are 
 entertained by many of our railroad companies, and consequently they 
 have not signed contracts, but nevertheless they have been paid, as /think 
 they should have been. 
 
 The practice in your department is both unjust and inconsistent, and if 
 persisted in, must drive me for redress to some other source. 
 Very respectfully, yours, (fee. 
 
 E. FONTAINE, President 
 
 Hon. J. E. Reagan, P. M. General. 
 
 Va. Central R. R. Co. 
 
 PosTOFFiCE Department, 
 Richmond, April 20, 1864. 
 
 Sir, — Your letter of the 15th instant, in answer to mine of the llth, is 
 just received. It exhibits such a departure from the ordinary courtesies 
 of official correspondence, and so persistent a determination to misunder- 
 stand and misrepresent what was said with the sole view of conceding 
 every thing to your company which you demanded, which could be con- 
 ceded according to law and the rules of right, and shows so manifest % 
 purpose to engage in useless controversy, that I can see no good which 
 could probably arise from any further answer to it than to acknowledge its 
 receipt, and to say that no desire has, in any way> been manifested by this 
 department to make any other exactions or to impose any other terms on 
 the road of which you are tiie president, than those which are made of 
 every other railroad in the service. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 JOHN n. REAGAN, P. M. GenereU. 
 E. Fontaine, Esq., Pres. Va. Central li, R. Co. 
 
 Virginia Central RailroaDj 
 P-esident's Office, JBeaverdam, Va-, April 22, 1864. 
 
 Dear Sir, — Your letter, stating that you considered mine of the 15th 
 instant discourteous, has been received. 
 Writing under some little excitement, from your declimng to settle with 
 
14 
 
 this compnny, as you bad done •with others under eimilar cirourostances, 
 I used ptrong lanpnuage to illustrate my objections to the contract as acted 
 on in the department ; but as I do not consider discourtesy any more jus- 
 tifiable in officiiil than in private correspondence, although you have done 
 me injustice in your last letter, I have no hesitation in saying that I did 
 not mean to be offensive, nor do I now think my letter is justly liable to 
 such construction. 
 
 My pole object was to endeavor to explain to you that your mode of en- 
 forcing the esecutii'H of the contract, though not designed, nevertheless 
 seemed to me to imply that the president and directors (f railroad compa- 
 nies were unworthy of confidence, which no gentleman, by any act of his, 
 ■would be willing to concede even by implication, and to call your atten- 
 tion to a fact, of which yu might not be aware, that an odious discrimina- 
 tion wae made against it in the settlement of claims with your department. 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 Son. J. H. Reagan, P. M. General. 
 
 E. FONTAINE, President. 
 
 PosTOFFiCE Department, 
 Eichmojid, April 26, 1864. 
 
 Sir, — In answer to your letter of the 22d instant, and to your preceding 
 letter of the 15th instant, I would say, that I regret you should have sup- 
 posed my letter of the 11th implied any reflection on the officers of your 
 company. Nothing was farther IVom my intention : the object of that let- 
 ter being to remove the objections Aviiich you had to executing a contract, 
 and to show you that two of the three objections which you urged were re- 
 moved by the previous action of the department, and that they should re- 
 main so, if desired by you, by provisions in the contract. The third point 
 of objection which you pressed is one which has come up in our corres- 
 pondence with many of the railroad companies ; and with all of them the 
 department has acted on the same views expressed in my letter of the 11th 
 to you. 
 
 in your letter of the 15th and of the 22d you assume that the depart- 
 ment discriminates between your company and other companies, by requir- 
 ing of yours the execution of a contract before payment can be made, while 
 it has settled with others without this requirement. I send you a copy of 
 my report of December 7th, on pages 10 and 11, of which you will see the 
 rule of action of the department stated. When I wrote you on the 20th, 
 my impression was that this rule had been departed from in no case, as it 
 certainly was my intention it should not be. IJpoi strict examination, I 
 iiud that the only apparent departure from it has been in the case of the 
 Richmond and Fredericksburg railroad, to which payment has once been 
 made since the 1st of July 1803, without a contract. 1 understand that 
 was made under the apprehension that, as the company could not perform 
 the service on the whole of the road, it was not necessary for it to execute 
 a contract. This was a mistaken view, and that company will be required 
 to execute a contract as all others are required to do. This, I am informed, 
 was the only case in which a payment has been made without a contract 
 since the expiration of the term of the former contracts. These facts, I 
 trust, will be a sufficient assurance to you that no discrimination has been 
 made against your company. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 JOHN H. REAGAN, P. M. General 
 
 E. Pontaxne, Esq., Pres. Va. Central R. R. Co. 
 
15 
 
 Extract from Report abote bsferred to. 
 
 " Railroad Service. 
 « 
 
 The department has omitted to advertise for proposals for mail service 
 on railroad routes, becaase of the fact that it is authorized, under existing 
 laws, to make contracts with railroad companies without advertisement; 
 and as there can be no competition for such service, the effect of an adver- 
 tisement would simply be to invite proposals for an increase of compensa- 
 tion, whicli could not be granted unless the postal facilities furnished by 
 the route should have so increased as to change the classification of tba 
 road, under the act approved May 9th, 1861. 
 
 Most of the railroad presidents have executed contracts vrith the depart- 
 ment for the transportation of the mails from the 1st of July 1863; but 
 there are some who refuse to execute contracts, although they are offcrei 
 the maximum rate of compensation for the first class roads. At the same 
 time they express their entire willingness to carry the mails, but are un- 
 willing to place their roads, and mail service on them, under even that 
 limited control of the department, which is necessary to give regularity, 
 certainty and security to the service. 
 
 The only remedies for the evils which must result from the transporta- 
 tion of the mails w'thout the restraining influence of contracts for its faith- 
 ful performance, which the department can apply, are, 1st, to withhold 
 payments for services performed without contract; and 2d, if they still re- 
 fuse to contract, then to withdraw the mails from such roads, and endeavor 
 to obtain some other mode of conveyance. 
 
 In view of the requirements of the law upon this subject, it will be my 
 duty to apply these remedies to all roads whose presidents persist in their 
 refusal to comply with the requirements of the department in relation t) 
 contracts ; for, although the practice has existed, to some extent, of per- 
 mitting the mail service to be performed on railroads without contract?, 
 and paying for such service by what are termed "Orders of Recognition," 
 Buch practice was clearly a violation of the law which forbids payment for 
 mail service until contracts shall have been executed according to law and 
 the regulations of the department. 
 
 Wealthy corporate monopolies should not be permitted to occupy such a 
 position in relation to the postal service of the country, on the great trunk 
 lines of mail communication, as would place such service completely with- 
 in their control, not only upon the main lines, but also upon the numerous 
 minor mail routes leading therefrcm ; for of what avail would it be for the 
 department to enforce on the part of the contractors upon these latter 
 lines, a strict compliance with the terms of their contracts in relation ti 
 schedules of arrivals and departures of the mails, if railroad lines are 
 permitted to carry the mails at pleasure, without the obligations of con- 
 tracts to compel their observance of fixed schedules, which are the essentir.I 
 element in a great net work of post routes ? It would be unjust, if the la^r 
 would tolerate it, to relieve them of conditions which are required of all 
 other contractors. 
 
 The department has never possessed, or attempted to exercise any other 
 authority over the schedules of arrivals and departures of mail trains upon 
 railroads than that necessary to require them to run in conformity with 
 schedules "agreed on" between them and the department; and these scbe- 
 dulea have usually been arranged in conventions held by the ofScere of 
 connecting lines, so as to obtain the uniform and close schedules of connec- 
 tion required by their own interests. 
 
 If any road, forming part of a through line between important points 
 he permitted to carry the mails without executing proper contracts fi,r 
 the faithful performance of euch eervice, the department will not have 
 
16 
 
 the power to prevent them from adopting any schedule they' may deem 
 best suited to their local business, without regard to their effect upon the 
 regularity of the mails on their own lines, or of their proper connections 
 with others." 
 
 Virginia Cjsntbal Railroad,,. 
 President's Office, Richmond, Ya., May 3, 1864. 
 
 Dear Sir, — Your letter of the 26th ultimo was received during the ab- 
 sence of several days on the line of the road. 
 
 I do not propose to continue the discussion of the subject of our correa- 
 pondence, but desire to say that I never have objected to a contract that 
 would enable you to secure the important objects for which you say in your 
 report contracts should be made, and that no penalty, however severe, 
 could have made this company more considerate of the public interest 
 than they have been without a contract. But my objections to your mode 
 of enforcing the contract, as set forth in my letter of the 15th uUimo, re- 
 main unchanged. At this critical juncture in our political affairs, I have 
 neither time nor disposition to agitato a matter which, in a 'pecuniary point 
 of vieiv, is of such trivial importance. 
 
 I shall therefore suspend all remedial actions for the present. I will 
 merely add, that Mr. Barbour informed me that he had settled with the 
 department without a contract, and Mr. Daniel states that he has settled 
 more than once. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 E. FONTAINE, President. 
 
 Eon. J. H. Reagan, P. M. General. 
 
 Virginia Central Railroad, 
 General Sitpi's Office, Richmond, Ya., July 28, 1864. 
 
 Sir, — I am instructed by the president of this company to say that his 
 duty to the stockholders will not allow him to continue the use of a car 
 by you for the mails and your agents, without compensation. The 
 mails have been carried to the satisfaction of the public for more than 
 twelve months, and you are understood to refuse to pay anything for this 
 service. 
 
 I am required to adopt some plan by which the company will get remu- 
 neration for the use of the large space heretofore occupied by your depart- 
 ment. At the same time the president has no desire to punish the people 
 of Virginia and the soldiers of our army, by rejecting the mail, even though 
 you persist in what he regards your course of injustice. 
 
 If the existing difficulties are not settled, on and after the 1st of August 
 1 shall demand of all your agents the payment of the usual fare for first 
 class passengers, where they travel with the mail, and shall also limit the 
 space to be occupied by the mail. 
 
 I am instructed by the president, however, to say that he is now, as he 
 always has been, willing to sign any reasonable and proper contract, which 
 will preclude the unlimited right of construction heretofore exercised by 
 the department, which induced him to decline signing the one offered hj 
 you. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 H. D. WHITCOMD, Gen. Sup. 
 
 Hon. J. E. Reagan,^ P. M. General. 
 
17 
 
 RicnuoND, July 19, 18C4. 
 
 ^ SiR_ — I have henn directed by the postmaster general to acknowled2;c the 
 receipt of your letter of the 28th instant, and to state that it was his ira- 
 •pression that tiie principal objection advanced by Mr. Fontaine, president 
 of the Virginia Central railroad, against the conditions which have always 
 becn'lfniiiraced in railroad contracts made with this department (and which 
 /'are identical in every particular'with those u.-ied in the United States post 
 office department Iroru the commencement of railroad transportation of 
 mails), had been satisfactorily met by him in the correspondence between 
 them. 'As the difliculties still existing with Mr. Fontaine are not pointed 
 out. in your note, and are not understo'id in their precise force by the de- 
 pautnient, I take the liberty of enclosing a blank form of contract, with tiio 
 request that you immediately submit the same to the president, and have 
 him interline' and alter the conditions therein so as to conform to his wishes, 
 in order that they may be considered by the postmaster genera). 
 Kespectfullv, 
 
 IL ST. GEO. OFFUTT, 
 
 Chief Contract Bureau. 
 n. D. Whitcomh, Esq., Gen. Supt. Va. Central R. R. 
 
 Beaterdam, July 30, 1864. 
 
 Dear Sir, — Yours, enclosing one from Jlr. OfFutt, is received, in which 
 bo requests me to repeat niyjj^jections to signing the contract which the 
 postoffice department has prepared. I informed the postmaster general, in 
 my last letter on the subject, that my objections were not satisfied, and that 
 I delayed action because just at that time the very critical condition of the 
 country made it inopportune to do so. 
 
 Mv objections are the same which have been stated before, and if I am 
 correctly informed, are entertained by many others besides myself. It i.s 
 'true that the provisions are identical with those contained in the contracts 
 of the old government, but the powers cfainied under these provisions and 
 the practice of the departmeut is very different, otherwise there would 
 have been no complaint. 
 
 Ist. I object to the broad power exercised by the postmaster general, of 
 giving his own interpretation of the contract, deciding for himself without 
 appeal, when the coutnict is not complied with. Immediately connected 
 'therewith, I object to his practice of exacting the payment of a fine, under 
 the rigid enforcement of the letter of the contract, when it is shown that 
 there was no dereliction of duty, but the company was prevented from do- 
 ing what was demanded, by cau.-ies over which they ha^ no control, aa iu 
 the case of the appropriation of the whole motive power of the company, 
 by authority of the war department, at some critical moment, for public 
 defence. In view of this practice, and the exercise of the sole right of in- 
 terpretation, the company must have some protection against the- possible 
 abuse of powers which may be claimed under clauses 1, 5, G and 7. 
 
 2d. The first article gives the "exclusive use" of the mail apartment to 
 " the department and its mail agent." The postmaster general has conceded 
 that it is proper that some officers of the company should be allowed to 
 travel in this car, to see that no use is made of it not contemplated by a 
 proper interpretation of the contract, and nevertheless he refuses admission 
 to the directors of the company, who, together with the president, are the 
 only specially appointed guardians of its interests. 
 
 3d. Upon the ex-parte report of some subordinate, he enters up fines, 
 without notification of the charge; and the contractor only knows that he is 
 o 
 
18 
 
 considered subject to the fine, when he comes to settle for his mail service. 
 This is contrary to the practice of the old government, whose form of con- 
 tract has been literally copied. It is in violation of the common princi- 
 ples of justice. It is like condemning a man to be hunp, and not giving 
 bim an opportunity for defence until the day of his execution. 
 
 My objections are entertained more against the principle of giving pow- 
 ers which may be abused, than on account of the pecuniary amoant in- 
 Tolved. 
 
 I do not know whether interlineation will correct these objections. I 
 will, however, examine to see ; hut I desire you to show this to Mr. Offutt, 
 and hope he will recognize the justice of providing for the points of ob- 
 jection. , 
 
 I can never consent to have the directors excluded from the mail car ; 
 and there must be some restraint on the power of fining without notice,' 
 when there is good cause for the mlleged delinquencies. If this is done I 
 will be satisfied. I think there should be some mode pointed out for set- 
 tling differences, say — a reference to the Secretary of War, or a board ef 
 referees. I will now see what I can do on the contract sent, by interlining 
 the suggested modifications. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 E. FONTAINE. 
 H. D. Whitcomh, Esq. 
 
 PosTOFFiCE Department, 
 Richmond, August 1, 1864. 
 
 Sir, On the 28th of July ultimo, I received from II. D. Whitcomb, Esq., 
 general superintendent of the Virginia Central railroad, a letter which 
 appears to have been written by your direction, in which he says, " I am 
 instructed by the president of the company to say that his duty to the 
 stockholders will not allow him to continue the use of a car by you for the 
 mails and your agents without compensation. The mails have been carried 
 to the satisfaction of the public for more than twelve months, and you are 
 understood to refuse to pay any thing for this service. I am required to 
 adopt some plan by which the company will get remuneration for the large 
 space heretofore occupied by your department. At the same time the pre- 
 sident has no desire to punish the people of Virginia and the soldiers of 
 our army by rejecting the mail, even though you persist in what he regards 
 your course of injustice. 
 
 " If the existing diflBculties are not settled, on and after the first of Au- 
 gust I shall demand of all your agents the payment of the usual fare for 
 first class passengers, when they travel with the mail, and shall also limit 
 the space to be occupied by the mail. 
 
 " I am also instructed by the president, however, to say that he is now, 
 as he always has been, willing to sign any resonable and proper contract, 
 which will preclude the unlimited right of construction heretofore exercised 
 by the department, which induced him to decline signing the one offered 
 by you." 
 
 In answer to this and pursuant to my instructions, the chief of the con- 
 tract bureau of this department on the same day inclosed to Superintendent 
 "Whitcomb a blank copy of a contract, with the request that he submit it 
 to you for such interlineations and modifications as would meet your views, 
 in order that we might have a precise view of your objections to the form 
 of contract which is used by this department, and has been signed by the 
 officers of the other railroad companies of the Confederacy generally, » 
 copy of which was sent you for execution on the seventh of September, 
 
19 
 
 1863. On this morning Mr, "Whitcomb returned this form of contract, with 
 your notes and interlineations, accompanied by a letter from you to him, in 
 ■which you re-state your'objections to signing a contract in the usual form ; 
 and in his note he says, " Trusting that this disagreeable subject will soon 
 be satisfactorily settled, I shall not issue the order relative to the agents of 
 the department, unless farther directioif's are given mc." 
 
 Your objections to signing the usual form of contract made with railroad 
 companies are substantially the same which you have heretofore submitted 
 to the department, and my answer uMist be substantially the same that I 
 have heretofore made you in several communications on this subject. 
 
 The form of contract used by this department is the one wLich has been 
 used with every railroad company which has contracted to carry the mails 
 for the Confederate States since the organization of our government ; and 
 it is a literal copy, in all its conditions, of the fi>rm of contract which had 
 been used by the government of the United States for many years before 
 the organization of our government. But you say that it is more to the 
 construction of the contract and the action of the department, to which you 
 object, that the form of the contract. The same rule of construction of 
 the83 contracts and the practice under them, prevail in this department 
 which prevailed under the old government; and the same rules and prac- 
 tice are applied to the road of which you are president, that are applied to 
 all other roads in the Confederate States. 
 
 You make substantially three objections to signing the usual contract 
 with the department : 
 
 1st. That the department claims the exclusive use and control of tho 
 mail cars. 
 
 2d. That the department makes deductions from the mail pay of the- 
 company for services not performed by it. 
 
 3d. That the department makes deductions and imposes fines for non- 
 performance of service, without notice to the railroad cumpanies previous 
 to the settlement of their quarterly accounts. 
 
 I. In answer to your first objection, I would say that you were advised' 
 by my letter of the 8th of July, 1SG3, and by a subsequent letter of the 
 11th of April, 1864, " that the rule excluding all persons from the mail cars 
 had been so far modified, and corresponding directions given to our agents 
 on all railroads, as to allow the presidents and superintendents of railroads 
 to travel in the mail cars when they wished to do so, and that conductors 
 should at all times be allowed to pass through and examine the mail cars, 
 to prevent any thing improper from being conveyed in them." 
 
 After you were notified of this modification of the rule of the depart- 
 ment admitting presidents and superintendents of railroads to ride in the 
 mail cars, you set up a claim that the same privilege should be allowed- the 
 directors of the road of which you are president. It is proper to say that 
 such a claim has not been made in behalf of the directors of any other road 
 in the Confederacy. 
 
 The department is not advised of the number of the directors of your 
 road, nor of the frequency of the trips they might wish to make in the mail 
 cars ; nor can it know how many of them might present themselves for 
 passage in the mail cars at any one trip, nor whether the mail cars would 
 have sufficient capacity to convey t):e mails and all the persons for whom 
 you claim this privilege. While the oflicial character of the persons for 
 \s-hoin the privilege is required mi;;li: be regarded as a sufficient guarantee 
 of the security of the mails against depre-Jation, it must be rememhered 
 that it is also essential that the muil agent shall have sufBcieut room to 
 empty the mail bags, assort, distribute and rebag the mail matter. This he 
 cannot do in a car occupied by numerous passengers. And the department 
 cannot consent that the postal service shall be rendered liable to iaterrup- 
 
20 
 
 tion from such a cause. If this last demanded concession were made, what 
 assurance has ahe department tliat a demand will nut fallow fitr tlie same 
 privilege fur all the stockholders of the road? Aifti why not for tlicm as 
 well as for the directors ? There is at least as muuh reason to expect this 
 as there was to expect that, when jou had been informed that the president 
 and superintendents of railroads were to he allowed to ride in the mail 
 cars, you WDuM then demand, as a cundition, that the directors andtrea- 
 surer should have the ssame privilege, or yon would cease to carry the 
 mails. If tliid privilege sh(juld be extended to the directors of your road, 
 a like privilege must l)e extended to the directors of all ether companies. 
 I cannot consent to this extension of the rule aj^ainst the admission of un- 
 sworn and unauthorized persons into the mail cars, as well because gf the 
 emb ii-rassmeut which such a course would proha'oly entail on the a>i;cnts of 
 the de|iarLment and the postal service, as because it would be a clear said 
 manifest violation of the spirit of the law, looking to the security of the 
 mails, thus to expose them to tlio forbearance of whole classes of persons, 
 who, if they did not themselves interfere with them, would, by their pre- 
 sence, destroy the responsibility of our agents, by putting it in their pewer, 
 in case of loss or impropriety, to say that there were so many other's pre- 
 sent they could not be hidrl responsible for a wrong which it was equally in 
 tbe power of any one of them to imve committed. 
 
 II. In answer to your second objection, I have to say, as I have hereto- 
 fore said to jou, that the department contracts fjr the carrying of the mails 
 a specified number of trips, upon a schedule of arrivals and departures 
 agreed on. It pays for the trips of service perfu-med, and refuses to pay 
 for .-ervice not perf )rmed. The precise fiicts on which this objection is 
 Vased are, that oa occasions the " whole motive power of the [your] com- 
 pany" is npfiropriated, "by authority of the war department," by which 
 you are prevented from carrying the mails. In such a case the department 
 refuses to pay you fjr the service which you do ni t perform, and fur which 
 you insist the company ought to Ijc paid. Why? Your "whole motive 
 power" is employed, by the authority of the war department, in the service 
 of thai; department, and not in the postal service; and the war department 
 pays your company fir that service. ' Up(m what principle 'do you demand 
 also to be paid by the post oftice department fur service which there is no 
 pretension of your having performed, and when the war department was 
 paying you for tlie use of your " whole motive power ?" The rule of this 
 department, under which it refuses to pay you fur what you never did, is 
 applied to all other companies just as it, is to yours, and seems to me so 
 manifestly just that I must express my surprise that it should be seriously 
 questioned in its application to such a state of facts. 
 
 III. Ln answer to your third objection, I would say, that under the, laws 
 and regulations relating to tiie postal service, and under the contrai;t .and 
 accompanying schedules of arrivals and departures of the mails, a i'ailure 
 of the mails cannot occur on your road without the knowledge of y-tur oH- 
 cers and agents ; and it is made the duty of all mail contractors, on the 
 occurrence of failures, to render a sneciiic excuse, setting fortii particularly 
 the cause of failure, as will be seen by reference to chapter 33 of the Regu- 
 lations of the Department, wliich was in force for many years in the United 
 States before its adoption by us. If failures occur, and the contractor, with 
 full knowledge of the fact and of the necessity of rendering an excuse for 
 it; fails to do so, tlie department proceeds to make its deductions on the set- 
 tlement of the quarterly account of the contractor. But in the case of rail- 
 roads, the department has so far modified this rule, as you were informed 
 in my letter of April il, 18G4, as to furnish the companies, on the settle- 
 ment of their accounts, with a statement of any f.iilures which m;iy have, 
 occurred, and for which deductions have been maue, giving the dates and 
 
21 
 
 places nt which the failores r.ccnrred. And the rtppartment cnriFeutp jifter- 
 wards to re-open the acQ^>iint", if the company wishes t.- present evirleiice to 
 excuse its failures!. But, in such ca=e.-5 an acccu: t -n-ilJ only be re->'perod 
 when it;ippe:irs that the company miirht have been tiiken by Furin-i.-e hj 
 the action of the department, or when, from any other aiuse,nianirej.t in- 
 juKtii-e WKtiM be done the company by a refusal to re-open the fi(?CiU''t. In 
 a pimple case of neglect or refusaf .on the part of the oompany 1 < send in 
 the 'necessary excuse at the proper time, when it had knuwlrdjie if the 
 failure and of the necessity for the excuse, the account would not bv re- 
 opened, and the deduction would-be required to stand. 
 
 I eticlnse to you herewith, a copy :if the circular seftt by this depnrtinrnt 
 to ruiitractor.o- whenever deductions li ive been made from their pny. strring 
 the amount of deductions and dates o.f the failures for which tb. v ■ :■■ m ''e. 
 and pettinp; forth the rules and reast ns on which these dedi.i 
 I also send you herewith a copy oT the circular sent by the <'■■ , o 
 
 all contractors on whom fines are imposed, statino; the amount ot tic lines 
 and the dates of the delinquencies for which they are impose i, and i''v!ng 
 the rules and reasons for esactinp; them. The rules on which fines rr.o tm- 
 po^ed and deductions made, and the practice of the department »it;der 
 them, hi^vo the sai'.ction of lony; use and the approval of a lon^ Hrerif pi.»t- 
 masters.jreneral under the old ;;overnment, as well as of the uniform prac- 
 tice of this jiovernment for more than three years. I have carefully ci,n- 
 sidered y,our objectiort* to them, but can see no renson which ca'ls for a 
 ' change, and mu<t adhere, in the case of your road as well as of all others, 
 to the;exi'-tini;re<iulations and practice. 
 
 In your l<-tier y^nu propose the creaticTJ of a new tribunal to settle differ- 
 ences of opinion between the department and its contractors. This would 
 re(]uire the action of the Iep;islative department of the covernrnent. if any 
 were necessury. There is i\p complaint or pretence that the department 
 fails or refuses, to pay contractors for all the services performed by thrm. 
 But your complaint is that the department refuses to pay your company for 
 service which it does not.pci form, and-when it is receiving pay from another 
 department of t^e government for the use of its " whole motive power," to 
 the exclusion of the mails. This is not a question of rules or practice of 80 
 doubtful import as to pive rise to* differences of opinion, which might be 
 adjusted by an appellate tribunal, but is simply a question as to whether 
 the department, in disregard of the laws and regulations for its government 
 and of the terms of the contract with its carrier, should pay for service 
 never performed It is proper to say, however, that if, in the settlement of 
 the accounts of a contractor by this department, he believes injustice has 
 been «ione him, he has the right of appeal from the auditor to the comp- 
 troller, wherehecan have a reh'^aring and a re- examination of the ca^^e. This 
 is the provision made by la^ to "secure both contractors and the department 
 against errors of decision, or disregard of law and the provisions of con- 
 tracts, by the oflBcers of parties concerned : and I have no autltority, if I 
 supposed it proper to do so, to agree to any other appellate tribunal. 
 
 Another point presented in the notice of Superintendent Whitcoml', is 
 that unless the department shall pay your company for the services per- 
 fnrined since the first of July, IS'63, it will refuse to carry the mails. 
 
 The department found it necessiiry ta insist that the railroad companies 
 should enter into contract with it, in or§er to give it the necessary power t6 
 control the schedules and giv^^ regularity and reliability to the mails. 
 Whore (companies, as was the ca-e with yours, refuse to enter intu cint' acts 
 and thus to become amenable to the lawsand regulations governiri: O-c ser- 
 vice, o\ir oidy alternative was to refuse payment to such companies for eer- 
 vice until they should consent t^ cnier into the usual contract. You have 
 been, I believe, repeatedly nrtified that whenever you shbuM cntsr into 
 
22 
 
 contract with the department, your past service would be recognized and 
 your company paid, and that you would not be paid until such contract was 
 made. I now repeat that I shall not authorize payment to your company 
 until it shall enter into contract. But if it chooses to enter into tlie usual 
 contract, I will then recognize its past service, and direct. payment to be 
 made for it. The question is not fairly presented when you say you will 
 not carry the mails lonj^er, unless the department pay you for past services. 
 You have from the first been notified that the departmerit would not pav 
 you for service unless you would enter into contract. On receiving; that 
 notice,' it was at your option to refuse or to continue to carry the mails. If 
 you chose to go on, the department had the right to expect that you intended 
 to enter into contract as it required. 
 
 Altogether, you insist on a change of the Kules and Regulations of the 
 Department to suit your views. You demand, as a condition absolute to 
 your continuance to carry the mails, that the department shall allow you 
 to determine who shall ride in the mail cars — a demand which it is not 
 probable was ever before made in the history of railroad service, and which 
 has certainly not been made by any company in the Confederate State?. 
 And you demand pay for service which you do not pretend to have per- 
 formed, and say you will not continue to carry the mails, unless the de- 
 partment will consent to pay you for past service without your entering 
 into contract. This department cannot concede any of these demands, as 
 you have been repeatedly informed. If, upon these facts, you choose to 
 rafuse to carry the mails, it only remains for the department to provide the- 
 next best service it can, and to notify the public that you refuse to carry 
 the mails for the government and people on the terms and conditions on 
 •which they are carried by all other railroads, and because the department 
 ■will not yield to your demand of stipulations and conditions which are 
 unlawful, against sound policy, and one of them unconscionable. 
 
 The course you propose to adopt is one which must so seriously affect 
 the interests of the people at large and of the government and army, that 
 I would respectfully request that you consent to submit the matter to your 
 board of directors before you take final action, and allow them to examine 
 the whole correspondence between us, a full copy of which I will h:ive 
 prepared for the purpose, if you request- it, 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 JOHN II. REAGAN, P. M. General. 
 E. Fontaine, Esq., Pres, Va. Ceiiiral R. R. Co. 
 
 Confederate States of America, 
 Post Office Department, 186 
 
 Sir: 
 
 A deduction of % has been made from your pay, as 
 
 contractor on Route No. , for 
 
 This has been done upon the principle, expressly stated in the adver- 
 tisement for proposals, and inserted in all the contr.icts of this depart- 
 ment for the transportation of the tnnils, that "in all cases there is to be a 
 forfeiture of the pay of the trip when the trip is not run." ■ 
 
 You are reminded of the necessity iff prompflj/ forwarding tn this office 
 any excuse which you may desire J) offer for a failure or delinquency, and 
 that " a specific excuse" is required, and "general allegations" are not 
 admitted. It is also important, where an excuse is tendered for having 
 failed to perform a trip or half trip.- that you state in it whether any, and 
 if any, what effort was made to perforin the service. 
 
 To entitle an excuse for any failure or delinquency to be considered, it 
 IS REQUIRED that the facts stated in it be in all cases veiified by the affidavit 
 
 / 
 
23 
 
 of the person having a personal knowledge of them, or by the official cet- 
 tificaj^tof a postmaster. 
 
 If, alter waiting a reasonable time, no specific and satisfactory excuse be 
 received, the case will be presented to the postmaster general for his action, 
 and no fine or deduction will be remitted on any excuse rendered after the 
 decision is made. 
 
 Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 , in charge of Inspection office. 
 
 [No. 3.] 
 
 Confederate States of America, 
 Post Office Department, 186 
 
 Sir: 
 
 The postmaster general has adopted the following Regulations 
 for the government of this office, viz : 
 
 " Inasmuch as failures to arrive at the end of their routes and other 
 points within contract time cannot but be known in all cases to contrac- 
 tors or their agents, it cannot be necessary to give them information thereof 
 when reported by postmasters ; and it is considered their duty to send to 
 the department forthwith their excuses for such failures, if any they have : 
 Therefore, 
 
 Ordered, That no notice be given to contractors of failures to arrive at 
 any post office in contract time as reported by postmasters to the depart- 
 ment; and if no excuse be received from them within a reasonable time, 
 the chief clerk is directed to present the case thus reported to the post- 
 master general for fine. 
 
 Ordered, That a specific excuse be required for each specific delin- 
 quency of any contractor, and that general allegations be not admitted. 
 If bad roads be alleged, a specific report must be made of what portion of 
 the road was so bad as to obstruct the mails, and what was its peculiar 
 condition. If high water, it must be shown what water courses were im- 
 passable ; and so of all other excuses." 
 
 Should you at any time fail to arrive at the end of your route, or any 
 intermediate post office, where time of arrival is fixed, within the time 
 specified in your contract or schedule, it will be expected of you imme- 
 diately, by yourself or agent, to send your excuse to this office, setting 
 forth particularly the cause of your failure, and what efibrt, if any, was 
 made to perform the trip, together with the exact dates and number of the 
 route ; and if, after waiting a reasonable time, no specific and satisfactory 
 excuse be received, the case will be presented to the postmaster general for 
 fine ; and no fine or deduction will be remitted on any excuse rendered 
 after the decision is |^ade. 
 
 You have been fined § 
 
 for failures at 
 
 on the 
 on Route No. 
 
 Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 , in charge of Inspection Office. 
 
 Virginia Central Railroad, 
 President's Office, Beaverdam, Va., August 6, 1863. 
 Hon. J. H. Reagan, P. M. General, 
 
 Sir, — I have received your letter of the 1st instant, in which you declare 
 your purpose of with-holding payment for the mail services of this com- 
 pany actually rendered, and I regret to find that to sustain this act of arbi- 
 
L'4 
 
 trary pnvver in dning palpuMe injustice, ynu have resorted tu uncandid 
 statenip.nts and imfair nrguinni's, ail ol whicli I tliink will be urumiuriced 
 by persons free frum \iiur escitemi^nt tu lie unti^cAmnig the hi<;l) pnsitiun 
 yon occupy in our government.* 
 
 Y( u refuse payment for past services actually rendered to the eati.-fac- 
 tion (if the public, duiing more tlian twelve iininiiis, because I decline to 
 sign the contracts which vdu have pvepiired ; contracts the cnnstrucni'ti and 
 enforcement of which under tlic :iuthnr:ty ilainieil and exercised by yi>u, 
 are ohjected to by other railroad Pre>-idi'iiis. a>: well as myself. Contracts 
 80 ^scejitible of abuse (as thewn h\ i-xperiencc) in your hands, tliat a 
 gentleman of high standing, as a Railroad Piesiiient, and in every other 
 capacity, says in a recent letter to nie. ' I would not sign them because of 
 objectionable jiowers reserved in th^m to the post office department, aiid 6t 
 arbitrary and unreasonable authority claimed to be exercised under them; 
 nor <Ji> 1 iuteiul to do so while Uiose olijutionvhle piwi^ioiis and prcici ices- 
 continue" Yonr course heretofore in construing and enforcing the contract 
 you require me to sign, is regarded liy others than myself as arbitraiy and 
 unreatio liable, and because I am not willing to give you powerover njy com- 
 pany, which may again be abused, yuu havc' resolved to do an act of moral 
 injustice in your official character lot called for hy a public purj.io>e to be 
 subserved, and which I am sure the people ()f the Southern C(jnfederacy 
 will noti approve, although it may put a little money in their treasury. 
 You say that contracts are necessary to ensure the regularity of mail trans- 
 portation on connecting routes. You have tried this company, the Rich- 
 mond, Fredericksburg & Potomac, and the Orange & Alexandria, the ( nly 
 connecting roads, for more than twelve mi nths without a contract.. Can 
 you allege as a justification of .your course any practical evil resulting 
 therefrom? I aver that no penalties e-xpressed in a contract, however 
 severe, would have made this company more punctual in making connec- 
 tions, under existing diflicultics attending the war, than they were without 
 one. Your withholding payment therefore for actual services rendered, is 
 in the language.of another Piailroad President, " arhiirary an iinrtasoiia- 
 hle." and presents a case of abuse of power which should be resisted in 
 this first operation of our government an account of its bad example, as 
 ■well as for the individual injustice done by it. I have always been willing 
 to sign a contract which did not invest you with "arbitrary and unreason- 
 able authority," and which gave adequate protectioii to the interests of the 
 Railroad Company. 
 
 I said I regretted to observe the want of candor and foirness exhibited in 
 your letter. On page 20 you say, " Tuu (i) demand as a condition abso- 
 lute to your coniinuanceio carry the mails, that the Department sdiall allow 
 you to determine who shall ride in the mail cars," and "say you u-dl not 
 continue to carry the mails unless the Department will ^nscnt to pay youjor 
 past service xvithout a contract." Instead of making Mis threat, I said the 
 very reverse, and it was before you when you wrote the letter, and is ac- 
 tually quoted by you from a letter of the General Superintendent of 2Sth 
 ult., (which you acknowledge to be written under my instructions,) in 
 v/hich alluding to his contemplated purpose of reducing the large space' 
 used by the Department wit;hout compensation, be says, "I am required to 
 
 *A careful reading of this letter now in the course of publication, suggests 
 to rne, that it may be considered harsh. It must be remembered that it is an 
 answer written under some excitement, to correct certain statements, and op- 
 pose imputations I thought very discourteous, at. the same time to protect the 
 interests of the company. It is however p'roper I should say, as I do now 
 without any solicitation, that my strong language was not intended to be of- 
 fensive, but merely to correct errors. 
 
25 
 
 adi">pt some plan hy which the company will get remuneration for the 
 lar^e space heretofore occupied by your departnient : nt the same time the 
 President has no desire to punish the people i)f Virginia and the soldiers of 
 our army, hy rejectinfj; the mail, even though you persist in what he re- 
 gardti your course of injustice."' For this wrong done by you, altlioui2;h [ 
 might have been justitied, I never intenied to withliold from the public, 
 the facilities of the railroad for carryin;^ the mails, but intended to object; 
 to signing the contract unless modified, remembering the " arbitrary and 
 unreasonable " course you pursued when 1 was in your power under a sivai- 
 lar one, and the annoying and vexatious exactions to which it would ex- 
 pone me. 
 
 Under the contract I signed for the first term, not apprehendinp; any 
 abuse of power which might be claimo 1 under it, you ordered the exclu- 
 sion of every officer of the company from the large apartment in which the 
 mails were carried, but subsequently agreed to permit the President and 
 Superintendent to " travel ofl the mail cars." 
 
 In allusion to this ill your letter, you say, "after you were notifioi of 
 tKismodifi.-ation of tlie rule of the Department admitting Presidents and 
 Superintendents of llailroads to ride in the inail cars, you set up a claim 
 tliat the same privilege should be allowed the Directors," and then you go 
 on to make extended remarks on the probability of my increasing my de- 
 mands as you make concessions. 
 
 This charge, like the first, is contradicted by the record, and as you seem 
 to rely much on it, to sustain your course. T will state tlie facts : Having 
 been ordered out of the mail cars by a written circular, I never entered 
 them again until after the 1st of July. LSG;). which terminated the con- 
 tract, although by reason of the crowds in the pacsenger cars, I was fre- 
 quently compelled to sit on a box in the baggage ci;r. I resolved in the 
 Tioxt contract to provide against notices of such (:loul)tfHl import, and to 
 protect the Company against a repetition of the exercise of "arbitrary and 
 unreasonable authority." claimed under the first contract: accurdinjily on 
 tiieod of .July, 18Go, I wrote to you, that continuing to carry the mail was 
 Eotto be 'ntorpreted as acquiescence in what had transpired. Among other 
 tbinsrs objected to in your enforcement of the expired contract, was the ox- 
 olusi(m oi' the Directors. I stated expressly that the " chief officers " of 
 this Company ought to have access to these mail apartments, and the 
 reason m-ged was to see that there were no uses made of them to the injury 
 t.f the Company's interest. Subsequent experience has abundantly proven 
 tliC wisdom of this precaution. It was in answer to this letter dated od 
 July, 1S03, demanding admission of the Directors, that on the 8th of the 
 same month you gave me the first notice of the modification mentioned, 
 and yet you construct a laboured argument on the statementj that I did 
 not make the demand untilnifter the notice. All your argument is there- 
 fore uiisound because based on data unsustained hy the fact. 
 
 In the letter to me of the 8th July 186^, above alluded to, you concede 
 that some officers of the company should travel in the mail cars ; in yOnr 
 own language, " to prevent anything impioper from beinsr carried in 
 them." Why should you assume the right to dictate what oflicers of the 
 Company shall perform this duty, which you admit is necessary. The 
 Directors are the chosen guardians of the Company's interests, and cannot 
 be excluded without the imputation, either that they cannot be trusted 
 where the mails are carried, or that they have not discretion to avoid crowd- 
 ing the mail .agent. There are only five of them, and they very rarely 
 travel more than one at a time. 
 
 I do not propose to follow your letter through all its voluminous errors 
 in statement and reasoning, but there is one other which I cannot properly 
 omit, viz : What you say as to the course of yoCir department iu reference 
 
26 
 
 to the imposition and exaction of fines as compared with that of the old 
 Government. You say on page 5, " the same rules of construction of these 
 contracts, and the practice under them, prevail in this department which 
 prevailed under the old Government." 
 
 This statement is so notoriously unsustained by the facts of the ca^e, 
 that I cannot account for it being found in a paper signed by you, except 
 on the idea, (which may also account for other errors,) that von had de- 
 volved the preparation of an answer to my letter on some Bureau nfficcv 
 and were not fully apprised of its contents — and consequently <ii 
 the inaccuracy of its statements. Let that be however as it mSy, it 
 is the fact that the '•practice in your department" under a contract of 
 the same provisions is so different from that of the old government 
 which has given rise to one of the most serious objections to signing the 
 contract. ^ In cases under the old U. S. government where postmasters re- 
 ported failures to arrive in contract time, or any other case subjecting the 
 contractor to a fine, it was the practice with this company for many years, 
 and with all others, I understand the same course prevailed, to send a no- 
 tice to the contractor immediately thereafter, apprising him specifically of 
 the charge, and enquiring why he should not be fined, thus giving him an 
 opportunity to furnish a satisfactory reason if he could do so, before the 
 fine was entered. Now I know from experience, and it also appears from 
 one of your regulations now before me, which you have enacted, that you 
 have in direct terms ordered a difl'erent practice from that of the old gov- 
 ernment, viz : "That no notice be given to contractors of failures to arrive 
 at any postoflice in contract time as reported by postmasters to the depart- 
 ment," and you do impose fines without notice. To justify yourself in re- 
 pealing and changing the practice of the old government, you make (as ap- 
 pears from the copy of the same regulation above alluded to,) a most un- 
 reasonable assumption, viz : that "failures to arrive at the end of routes or 
 other points cannot but be known, &c. &c.," and you require the contrac- 
 tor to state the most specific reasons for each failure with his affidavit in 
 advance without knowing whether you intend to line or not. I should 
 have, under this regulation, to find out daily throughout the year whether 
 the trains arrive in contract time at six places. The details of your re- 
 quirements to get relief from one of these fines, imposed without notice, 
 constitutes another most material change from the "practice of the old go- 
 vernment." The affidavits of all the details required, and the diflBculty of 
 finding out whether failures occur, would be so harrassing and vexatious 
 that the fines would in ninety-nine cases out of hundred, be paid rather 
 than incur the trouble of getting clear of them- 
 
 Your regulations sent along with your letter present a new and serious 
 objection to any one coming under your authority by signing a contract. 
 During this war, knowing the endless number of causes of failure, 1 might 
 have to make two thousand one hundred and ninety affidavits to ^'Ct clear 
 of your fines. 
 
 When enquiries are made why you have changed the practice of the old 
 government on this subject of " notice " before fining — the answer which 
 I am informed you give is extremely offensive : that if the delinquency was 
 specified at the time, and before fining, parties would have an opportunity 
 to manufacture a false excuse to fit the case. Is it not strange that a Yan- 
 kee Postmaster General who never required any of these things, should be 
 more appreciative of honorable motives than one of our Southern gentle- 
 men? 
 
 Your practice under the contract differs in another most material partic- 
 ular from that of the old government: with them, if the service was ren- 
 dered, it mattered not whether it was done voluntarily or by requirement of 
 a contract, the moral obligation to pay was recognised, and it would seem 
 
27 
 
 that these moral obligations ought to be specially observed in dealings be- 
 tween a government and private parties where there is no power of coer- 
 cion by law. 
 
 I have desired to compromise the diflSculty. I have proposed in case of 
 a difference of opinion as to the equity of your decisions, that we should 
 appeal to the Secretary of War, but you are inexorable and resolve to con- 
 tinue in the unrestrained exercise of your individual construction and en- 
 forcement of your contracts. 
 
 Officially and individually I have made and expect to make sacrifices 
 when necessary, to sustain our government through its struggle for inde- 
 pendence, and on that principle, this company like most others, has under-* 
 taken to carry the mails for a sum infinitely less than the space occupied 
 by them would yield in the cheapest freight transportation, and therefore, 
 for the public accommodation, we shall (as you have been before fully 
 advised,) continue to carry them, even if you continue to withhold pay- 
 ment for service actually rendered ; but though willing to make pecuniary 
 sacrifices, (whatever others may do,) with my experience of your course. 
 I cannot, by signing your contract, sanction the exercise of " arbitrary and 
 unreasonable authority," which if acquiesced in, will soon make the Poet- 
 master General a despot in his sphere of operation. 
 
 I will not pursue this subject farther, but supposing that for the present, 
 ear transportation of the mail is to be done without any pay from your de- 
 partment, we must try and make something out of the surplus room in the 
 mail car, as you were notified by ^Ir. Whitcomb. 
 
 Very respectfully, . 
 
 E. FOXTAIXE, President. 
 
 Virginia Central Railroad, 
 General Stipt^'s Office, Richmond, Va., Avg 4, 1864. 
 Sir, — I respectfully ask the return of the original letter of tlie president, 
 addressed to me, relating to the proposed contract. I kept no copy. I will 
 send A cofiy to you if desired, or you can take one. as you think best. 
 
 I have read the letter of the postniaster general to the ])resident of this 
 company, and observe, with extreme surprise, the fillowing passage: 
 * '• Another point presented in the notice of Superintendent Whitcomb i", 
 that unless the department shall pay your company for the services per- 
 formed since the Ist of July, 1803, it will refuse to carry the mails." 
 
 I have carefully read over my " notice" to the postmaster general, and 
 feel compelled to say that no such threat is contained in that document, and 
 no language is used which would warrant such a construction On the 
 contrary, I stated that " the president has no desire to punish the people of 
 Virginia, Ac, by rejecting the mail, even though you persist in what he re- 
 gards your course of injustice." 
 
 Very respectfully. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 H. D. WHITCOMB, Gen. Sup. 
 
 H. St. Geo. Offutt, Esq., ChieJ Contract Bureau. 
 
 PosTOFFiCE Department, 
 
 Eichmond, Aiig. 4, 1864. 
 Sir, — Mr. Offutt, the chief of the contract bureau, has handed me your 
 letter of this date, in which you say : 
 
 " I have read the letter of the postmaster general to the president of this 
 company, and observe, with extreme surprise, the following passage: 
 
28 
 
 •" Another point presented in tlie notice of Supei'mtonilent \\'!src nib 
 is. th^it unless the ilepjirtment shall pay your company for tlmtser-. i.-cV; pnr- 
 forniel since the 1st' of July, 18(3o, it will refuse to enrry the mails ' 
 
 '• I have carefully read over my ' notice' to tlie postmaster geiteral. ■\'\(l 
 ft>el compelled to say that no suoh threat is coiituined in tlriu (hn'uoi nr, 
 ssnrl no lanjruajre is use^ which woiild warrant such a con---: Oi\ 
 
 the contrary, I stated the president has no de-ire to punish of 
 
 Virtrjnia. &o., by rejectino; the mail, even though you ]'(m--;- h-^ 
 
 regards your course of injustice." 
 
 lo votir notice above referred to, you say : 
 ' " I am instructed by the president of tliis company to sii\. ity 
 
 to the stnclclioldcrs icill not allow him to cnniimie the use of - . -'or 
 
 ihc'm'Tils ,vrl yiiur a(jcnts,xcithout coinpcnsution-" And fn Tl-piiin \iai'»ay, 
 " If the Ci-i-ifing difficulties are not settled, on and after the !>■/ '■/' Ain/n.^fi 
 ahull (Icviand nf all your agents the pnyment of the usual nre aj fry- r'liss 
 pai<S'-iiners. lohen they travel toith the mail, and shall also limit f.l'' ■; ■■■ ■■ to 
 be vcviipicil liy the mails." 
 
 I (pjMted the M'hole of your notice, including the above -pit- ny 
 
 letter to the president of the company^ which you say you lia\e hmu I 
 now itali'-ise these passages, to call your .attention specially to them. It 
 is my duty to say that your notice would convey to any stranger to this 
 discussion the impression that this deparhnent had refused, and was- re- 
 fusing!; to pay the company for the service it had perfornu'd and was per- 
 {orm'wf:,, and thAt in consequence of thts, you proposed to.rt^fuse to Onry 
 the mails, unless payment was made. Now, the truth is — and -I suppose 
 Tou have all the'tirae been. fully aware of it^that this department is now, 
 and has all the time been willing and anxious to pay your c loipafiy for all 
 the service it has performed or may perform, if it would enter into the 
 usual contract. And a further truth is, that you proposed by your notice 
 to coniftcl the department to pay your company witbotit its having eriteied 
 into contract. ■ ' 
 
 The terms of contract between the department and railrmd compisnies 
 require, " that the mails shall be conveyed in a secure and safe manner, 
 free from wet or other injurj', in a separate and convenient car, or, apart- 
 ment of a car, suitably fitted up. furnished, warmed and liglited, under 
 direction of the postoffice department, and to the satisfaction of the post-, 
 master general, or of his authorized special >agent, at the expense <.r the 
 contractor, for the assorting and safekeeping of the mail, and for the ex- 
 clusive use of the department aud its mail figent'; and such agenUshall bo 
 conveyed free of charge." - 
 
 And " that the company shall convey, free of charge, * * * 
 all aoci'edited special agents of the department, on the exhibition of their . 
 credentials." 
 
 I did not profess to give your language when I said your notice was a re- 
 fusal to continue to carry the mails, unless the department would pay the 
 company for past services, rendered without a contract, and with notice 
 that it would not pay for service'without a contract. 
 
 You say such was not the language or meaning of your notice. But you 
 cannot be ignorant of, the fact that this department could not send its mail."? 
 along your road by a " passenger," wliieh you proposed to consider its 
 agent, or without the room and facilities required for the security and dis- 
 tribution of the mails, and under circumstances which would exclude the 
 department from the exclusive control of tiio necessary rocim and fat^ilities 
 •to enable it to have the service performed. When you refuse to allow the 
 department the means and facilities for carrying the mails, and refuse to 
 enter into tho usual and necessary contract to enaljle it to carry them on 
 your road, whatevsr ingenuity of language-you employ to avoid the resjion- 
 
29 
 
 sibili*y of a refusal to carry tlie mails, I am authorized an;l boui.d to re- 
 gard such aftiun as a refusal to carry the mails. If we CiiiiiKit a'Tfec ai? to 
 the effect of your notice, the public muvt, in case of necessity, juda,e be- 
 tween U3. I chose to consider and act on the meaning and etfect of your 
 notice, in view of the precedent facts and necessary consequence;? which 
 must flow fmm it, and not to spend time in discussinjx the questiisn ns to 
 whether deprivine; the department of the means to carry the mailsonyour 
 road, and refusing to carry them under a contract which would suliject the 
 cunipanv to the laws and regulations which provide for the security of the 
 mails aiid the regularity of the service, was or was not a refusal to carry 
 the mails. 
 
 Very respectful I v, 
 
 JOiiN il. REAGAN, P. M. General. 
 JI. D. Whitcomb, Esq., Gen. Supt. Va. Central /?. R. 
 
 RicnjioND, Va., August 0, 1804. . 
 
 Sir, — Below I send you a copy of an order from Mr. "Whitconib, gpiieral 
 superintendent of the Virginia Central railroad, to the conductors of 8p,i(i 
 road : , , 
 
 " August 5, 1864. — On and after Tucday next, you will demand from 
 the agents of the postoffice department traveling on the cars, the regular 
 fare for first class passengers. In executing this order for the present, how- 
 ever,' nothing is to l)e done to the ro}ite ayent in cht.ir(;c oj the mail, wlilcb 
 will prevent its being distributed as u,>^ual. Should he refuse payment, 
 your remedy will be to report the fact to me for further action. 
 
 II. D. WUITCOMB, GcH. Sup." 
 
 Today the order was made, and we positively refused to pay the fare. 
 
 They have taken our water cooler and sto\e out, and wo now have none 
 of the comforts heretofore enjoyed in the car. 
 
 Please instruct us what to do. 
 
 Very respectfully. 
 
 Hull. J. n. Reagan, P. AT. General. 
 
 ^\M. II. HAAS, 
 U. G. UOOCil. 
 Route Agents Ventral R. R, 
 
 PoSTOFFiri: TlKrARTJIEN'T, 
 
 Richmnnd, Augir.'it 10, 1801. 
 Gen'tlemev: 
 
 Y.iur letter of yesterday, furnishing me with a copy of the order of II. 
 D. Wliitcomb, Esq., geuerfil superintendent of the Vuginia Cfentral Rail- 
 road, dated the 5th instant, to the conductors of said railr ad, directing 
 thera to demand from the agents of the postoflico department the regular 
 i'are for first class passengers, and advising me of your refusal to pay the 
 fare, is received. You also say, "they |the railroad company) have taken 
 our water cooler and stove out, and we now have none of the comforts 
 heretofore enjoyed in the car." 
 
 You did right in refu.siug to pay the fare demanded under this order, 
 and you are directed not to go upon the cars of this company as the agents 
 of this department, nor to attempt to carry the mails on them hereaftef, 
 unless by its directions, hereafter to be given. 
 
 You will please notify Mr. E. J. Swift, your associate route agent, that 
 this order applies to him as well as to yourselves. 
 Very respectfully. 
 
 .JUlIN- II. RE AG AX, P. M. General, 
 
 Win U. Uxas and G. G. GoocJi, Rnitc Jgcnt-f, Va. Cent. R. Jt. 
 
30 
 
 The following letter was delivered possibly after the others were in type, 
 but several days before the pamphlet appeared: 
 
 Virginia Central Railroad, 
 Presidenfs Office, Richmond, Va., August 31, 1864. 
 JIo7i. J. H Eeagan, P. M. General. 
 
 Dear Sir, — I have reason to suppose that you misunderstood what I 
 have done and proposed to do on the subject of the demand of the pay- 
 ment of fare from the Route Agents of the Postoffice Department on this 
 road about the time of the withdrawal of the mails, and deem it proper 
 that you should be correctly informed-^the statement of facts is as 
 follows : 
 
 You had considered it your duty to withhold payment for the service of 
 1SG3-4 in consideration of the contract not being signed, for reasons it is 
 not now necessary to mention. The Board of Directors being very unwill- 
 ing to have a rupture with the Department on this subject, bad more than 
 once considered _ how the space appropriated to the mails could be made 
 productive in this state of things. The mail apartment was unnecessarily 
 large, having been constructed to suit the U. S. mail, which by reation of 
 the franking privilege was on an average at least twice as large as that of 
 the Confederate mail ; I called the attention of the Superintendent to the 
 views of the Board about the last of July. It was found that the mail 
 apartment was 22 feet in length ; it was curtailed to 13^ feet in length, 
 being in the opinion of the superintendent and other officers familiar with 
 the size of the mails, larger than was necessary. 
 
 In addition to this, the general Superintendent suggested that the route 
 agent ought to pay his fare as he had no free privilege by contract; to 
 this I objected, as it might bring on the very difficulty with your depart- 
 ment which I wished to avoid ; but on the renewal of the suggestion from 
 him, I consented that he might make the experiment, but with the dis- 
 tinct instruction, that if payment was declined, nothing should be done 
 which could at all interfere with the continued execution of the agents 
 duty, in attending to the mails. 
 
 I herewith enclose to you copies of the Superintendent's instructions, on 
 the subject, to the conductors, from which you will see, that it never was 
 his intention, much less my own, to insist on the collection of fare from 
 the route agent if objected to. When the Superintendent received an an- 
 swer from the department, showing their construction of his notice, per- 
 haps if he_ had then explained our intentions, on the subject of asking 
 fare, it might have been better, but the copies of instructions, and this 
 explanation will prove that we never contemplated the slightest possible 
 interference with the accommodation, regular transmission, or distribution 
 of the mails. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 E. FONTAINE, President. 
 
 August 10, 1864. 
 Conductor : 
 
 The postmaster general has chosen to construe my notice that I would 
 expect passengers fare from the route agents in charge of the mails while 
 we were carrying it without contract, and without pay, into a threat on 
 my part that we would not carry it at all ; my order was explicit, that noth- 
 ing way to be done which would prevent the regular distribution of the 
 mail. But in crier to put this matter entirely at rest, you will discon- 
 t.m>e the demand from the route agents, although so long as there is 
 nothing paid by the postoffice department, such fare is undoubtedly duo 
 to the company; 
 
 II. D. WIIITCOMB, Gen. Supt.