ARGUMENT - 
 
 CHARLES G. LOSING,' ESQ. 
 
 ON BEHALF OF THE 
 
 EASTERN RAIL-ROAD COMPANY, 
 
 PETITIONS OF DAVID PINGREE AND OTHERS, 
 AND W. J. VALENTINE AND OTHERS, 
 
 BEFORE 
 
 THE RAIL-ROAD COMMITTEE 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS LEGISLATURE, 
 
 BOSTON, MARCH T, 1845. 
 
 BOSTON: 
 
 DUTTON AND WENTWORTH, PRINTERS, EXCHANGE STREET. 
 
 1845. 
 
SeW-.. 
 
 1 -. 
 
MASSACHUSETTS LEGISLATURE. 
 
 BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS AND 
 CANALS. 
 
 Hearing on the Petitions of 
 
 David Pingree, and other, and of 
 W. J. Valentine and others. 
 
 Friday Afternoon, March 7, 1845. ) 
 
 In the HaU of the House of Representatives. i 
 
 The Committee having been called to order by the Chair¬ 
 man, the Hon. Linds Child,— 
 
 Mr. Loring said: 
 
 Mr. Chairman , and Gentlemen of the Committee ,—The 
 questions before the Committee are of great importance, 
 both because of the principles of State policy in relation to 
 the system of rail-roads, and of the magnitude of the private 
 interests, involved. 
 
 At no period has it been of greater moment to consider 
 gravely, and settle cautiously the leading principles of legis¬ 
 lation, Vhich are to govern the policy of the State in refer¬ 
 ence to this great and extremely important subject. Arid 
 never was it of more serious concern to recognize and deter¬ 
 mine the relative rights and interests of the State, and of 
 those who, having received charters at its hand, have pro¬ 
 ceeded to invest vast amounts of private property under them, 
 and in faith of the inviolability of the contracts, which they 
 imply or expressly contain. 
 
4 
 
 That there are rights on both sides necessarily implied by 
 and resulting from the existence of such charters,—and that 
 they are as sacred as any others,—no one will have the har¬ 
 dihood to deny, who does not repudiate all moral and legal 
 obligations whatsoever. And that there are public interests , 
 of far greater moment than the mere gratification of popular 
 will, involved in the exercise of the powers by which these 
 charters are created, cannot be questioned by any man who 
 is not prepared to substitute the popular excitement of a 
 day for the eternal principles of justice and good faith. 
 
 The petition of David Pingree and others, and the remon¬ 
 strance of the Eastern Rail-road Company, seem to involve 
 all the principles of State policy, and all those affecting the 
 relative rights and obligations of the State and persons hold¬ 
 ing charters under it, and to be the only ones now before the 
 Committee about which controversy can exist. And I there¬ 
 fore shall commence with them, and, for the present, confine 
 myself exclusively to them. And I hope to satisfy the Com¬ 
 mittee, that the grant of the prayer of the petition would be 
 alike inconsistent with all the principles of public policy in 
 reference to a well arranged system of rail-roads; uncalled 
 for by any public exigency that will justify the exercise of 
 legislative power in taking private property for the purpose; 
 and incompatible with the good faith of the State towards 
 the remonstrants. 
 
 Before proceeding, however, to the consideration of these 
 questions of policy, law, and fact, I beg leave to notice some 
 of the remarks of the counsel for these petitioners in the open¬ 
 ing of his case. 
 
 It was said, and has been repeated more than once, that 
 the present location of the Western terminus of this road at 
 East Boston, was to benefit speculators in land. We gave 
 notice, that if these statements were made, we should require 
 proof. Not a particle has been offered, though all the parties 
 are alive and at hand. We came fully prepared to disprove 
 it, and show it to be an unfounded calumny. And I am in¬ 
 structed so to declare it; I do therefore deny it,—and claim 
 of the Committee to discard this charge from their minds, or 
 give opportunity for investigation, before permitting it to have 
 any influence upon them. Nor would it be unreasonable for 
 
5 
 
 us to go further and say,—that such groundless imputations 
 so boldly and broadly made, without a shadow" of proof to rest 
 upon, may well throw great distrust upon the other statements 
 and assertions made, and alike unsupported by evidence. 
 
 Another position taken, was, that this Co mmi ttee were not 
 sitting as a judicial tribunal, to decide upon the merits of the 
 questions presented, as had been recently suggested; hut 
 were only exercising what the gentleman calls the judicial 
 functions of a grand jury,—to ascertain whether there was 
 cause for presenting a bill to the House. 
 
 As the gentleman has officiated as counsel, Committee man, 
 and witness, throughout the case, according to the exigency 
 of the moment, I must infer that he made this remark as a 
 Committee man, and not as counsel, inasmuch as a grand 
 jury has no judicial powers whatever; and examines only far 
 enough to find whether there he sufficient ground of suspicion 
 to warrant a trial, and hears only one side. Whereas this 
 Committee not only hears both sides of the evidence and ar¬ 
 gument, and decides in the first instance; but is the only 
 tribunal that does so. And when we consider the great and 
 delicate questions of policy, law, and mutual rights, agitated 
 before this Committee, and necessarily passed upon by them, 
 it is obvious, that its duties are in the highest degree judi¬ 
 cial, and involve all the obligations of impartiality, exami¬ 
 nation, deliberation, and conscientious decision, that belong 
 to the highest judgment-seat in the land. 
 
 Before proceeding to the investigation of the law and the 
 facts, I cannot forbear allusion to the great and overwhelming 
 power which the Legislature exercises on these occasions, and 
 which, for the purposes of this hearing, is in great measure, if 
 not substantially vested in this Committee. 
 
 The power of the Legislature, incidentally to impair or 
 destroy private property, even without compensation, cer¬ 
 tainly exists in many cases, and is' under no other control 
 than its sense of justice. But it is a power to be most care¬ 
 fully and scrupulously exercised, and never without a com¬ 
 manding public necessity. It is vested in the Legislature 
 for the highest and best of purposes. If abused, it accom¬ 
 plishes the lowest and the worst. It becomes a foul des¬ 
 potism. 
 
6 
 
 In governments where the power resides in the privileged 
 few, abuses of this sort, if extensively practised, finally arouse 
 the passions of the people, and the rulers are hurled from 
 their thrones. In this country, the danger from such abuse 
 is greater, because here the people are the only rulers, and 
 fear no one; and there is seemingly no appeal. But let us 
 not deceive ourselves: although we have no rulers, to be 
 startled by the opposition of rebellious subjects, our whole 
 political existence depends upon the confidence of the people 
 in the government, or rather in each other. And if mistrust 
 of the purity and good faith of the State, or honesty of the 
 people, once become general,—if it be extensively felt, that 
 property is not safe in the keeping of the government, such 
 as it is, it will not be long before those who have it, will be 
 seeking protection under one of a different form. 
 
 Security is the great end of government; and for that, men 
 will sacrifice not merely its forms, but much of its substance. 
 And, although there may be no other appeal, there will be 
 one from our fears and our necessities, to our desire of se¬ 
 curity. And all history tells, that while the first step from 
 want of faith in the government, and security in property, is 
 anarchy,—the next and no less certain one, is substantial 
 despotism. 
 
 I now proceed to consider the grounds upon which the pe¬ 
 titioners rest their claims. 
 
 I.—The great number of petitioners. 
 
 Upon this much stress was laid in the opening, and it has 
 been adverted to at intervals throughout the hearing, and de¬ 
 mands consideration. 
 
 It is indeed a formidable array—counted by hundreds and 
 tens of hundreds, and designed, and expected, to produce an 
 imposing, if not overwhelming and conclusive influence. 
 
 I had occasion, in a former hearing on another petition, to 
 remark, that the weight of a petition is to be estimated by 
 the reasons assigned for it—and not by the number of names 
 attached to it;—that if the thirteen hundred persons who 
 signed that petition had but one reason to urge in its support, 
 it was entitled to no more weight, in the decision of such a 
 
7 
 
 question, than if signed by one man. It was after all but 
 the same thing thirteen hundred times repeated. 
 
 But when it is considered how petitions are “ got up ”—and 
 with what different motives, and for what different reasons, 
 and with what various degrees of knowledge and intelligence 
 upon the subject, the parties subscribe to one,—it will be 
 manifest that, upon a question partaking, as this does, of a 
 judicial character, and involving the rights and interests of 
 others, and the public faith and welfare—numbers are of very 
 little consideration. 
 
 The ease with which names are obtained to such petitions 
 is familiar to every one. Some will sign under the influence 
 of a pique or prejudice against the corporation whose inter¬ 
 ests are attacked—or against some one or more of its officers, 
 from some actual or fancied personal neglect or slight; some 
 because a new road will accommodate them rather better, by 
 passing nearer to their house or store, or meeting-house; 
 some because they anticipate that they shall obtain transpor¬ 
 tation at a cheaper rate: and many, and probably the chief 
 number, merely because they are asked to sign, and do it 
 thoughtlessly, believing that it can do no harm, or because it 
 is more easy than to say no ! and some perhaps with suffi¬ 
 cient knowledge of the subject, and the idea that the public 
 good will upon the whole be promoted. 
 
 Now it is obvious that where the prayer of any petition is 
 adverse to the private interests and rights of others, or may 
 involve a sacrifice of the public faith with individuals, or any 
 interference with private property,—all the reasons above 
 suggested, excepting the last, are in truth and justice so many 
 against the propriety of granting it—instead of weighing in 
 its favor. 
 
 Surely the interests and rights of others, and the public 
 faith, and private property, are n6t to be invaded or trifled 
 with, to gratify personal piques and resentments, nor to ac¬ 
 commodate other private interests, nor to enable persons to 
 travel at a cheaper rate than reason and public policy require^ 
 nor to gratify those who sign a petition merely to avoid say¬ 
 ing no—or with no thought or knowledge of the consequences 
 of its being granted. 
 
On the contrary, so far as these are the motives for any 
 such petition, they are reasons for suspecting and rejecting it. 
 
 Again, petitions of this sort ought not to be esteemed as in¬ 
 tended to .bias the judgment and decision of the Legislature, 
 hut merely as claims far its full consideration of the subject. 
 And any attempt to use them as means of popular influence 
 in such a'healing as this, is a palpable abuse of the right of 
 petition; an impeachment of the integrity, wisdom and im¬ 
 partiality of the Legislature; and an injustice to many of 
 the petitioners themselves. 
 
 Consider, what are the nature and subjects of this inquiry ? 
 
 Is it not whether the highest and most sacred power of the 
 Legislature shall be exercised, that of taking the property of 
 one set of citizens and placing it in the hands of another 1 
 Is it not whether the private property of the present Eastern 
 Rail-road Company shall be sacrificed or impaired in greater 
 or less degree 1 Is it not whether the prayer can be granted 
 consistently with the good faith of the State to the remon¬ 
 strants 1 Does it not involve the strictest scrutiny into the 
 necessity or expediency of the sacrifice, and its compatibility 
 with the honor of the State 1 Does it not require careful and 
 impartial investigation, and weighing of various evidence— 
 and the just application of the great principles of eminent 
 domain, and of private property, to that evidence 1 
 
 And are these matters to be settled and disposed of by 
 papular influence merely, whether coming in shape of resolu¬ 
 tions, or harangues, or petitions 1 I respectfully submit that 
 it cannot be so. The questions arising upon applications of 
 this sort, (as was justly said the other day,) are of a strictly 
 judicial character, to be heard and decided upon evidence and 
 law—and not by popular clamor in any form. 
 
 The petitioners are truly and properly parties on one side, 
 and the remonstrants parties on the other. The one party is 
 seeking to take from the other that which the other claims 
 the right to retain. And it is a plain departure from first 
 principles, and from all ideas of justice, to allow the num¬ 
 bers and influence of either side to affect the decision of the 
 right. That stands forever, and immutably the same , let 
 the authority of numbers or popular feeling be on which side 
 
9 
 
 it may. And this right the Committee, I know, will seek 
 out—and when found, implicitly obey, without fear and with¬ 
 out favor towards any party, however imposing in numbers, 
 or however sustained by popular clamor. 
 
 Indeed, sir, I should feel that I was doing injustice to the 
 great body of these petitioners, if I did not avow my convic¬ 
 tion of their concurrence in these views. I have no belief 
 that they have signed these petitions in the expectation or 
 wish that they should be granted at all events; or that the 
 Legislature should infer that they had, individually, carefully 
 considered the case, and upon a full view of the merits of 
 both sides, thus expressed their opinion of the propriety and 
 justice of a grant of their prayer; and still less that they 
 should be esteemed desirous of creating a popular influence 
 to sway the decision, or control the judgment, of the Legisla¬ 
 ture. They doubtless signed for the purpose merely of 
 bringing the subject emphatically before the Legislature, as 
 one worthy of its immediate and most careful consideration ,— 
 and relying that it would be decided upon those principles of 
 public faith and policy, which should prevent any unjust sac¬ 
 rifice of the rights of others. This is the only legitimate, 
 honest purpose, for which they could sign. They appear 
 here just as parties appear in court —each trusting in the 
 right of his own side—but neither claiming to demand what 
 is not justly his due—nor to control the tribunal by the weight 
 of his personal influence. 
 
 So far from believing that the majority of these petitioners 
 desire to have any undue influence result from their thus 
 subscribing their names, if we could strike off all who be¬ 
 came parties, by reason of personal pique, or ill-will to some 
 one or more of the ofiicers of the corporation remonstrating, 
 and all who considered themselves as having a direct interest 
 in the question, and all who are interested but who prefer 
 honesty to thrift, I would cheerfully submit the decision of 
 the question to the remainder. 
 
 The only plausible argument that can be suggested as fur¬ 
 nished by the number of petitioners, is, that it is proof of the 
 public want or necessity. But a moment’s examination 
 shows this to be entirely fallacious. For as the petitioners 
 are all indiscriminately admitted as witnesses, all their rea- 
 2 
 
10 
 
 sons which can operate in favor of the petition may he shown 
 in evidence—and thus he fairly weighed, encountered and 
 considered. And it is therefore very certain that every possi¬ 
 ble reason that induced any one to subscribe is now before 
 this Committee. And the reason can be no better nor worse 
 for the number that put it forward. The reason is the same, 
 and must stand or fall by its own weight. Thus all the in¬ 
 habitants of Danvers might sign because they think it would 
 be advantageous to that town to have a rail-road through it— 
 and for no other reason. And yet it might be clearly shown 
 that this was no good reason for a rail-road such as is asked 
 for, but, oh the contrary, that the public good would be 
 equally, or much better promoted, by a branch from the pres¬ 
 ent road to Danvers; and that it would ultimately be better 
 for Danvers itself, that the petition should not be granted. 
 So all the inhabitants of Salem, and of Boston, might sign 
 it because anticipating a reduction in the rate of fares, if 
 successful; and yet it might appear, upon full evidence, that 
 so far from producing any permanent reduction, it would 
 ultimately tend to an augmentation of the rates of fare; or 
 that such reduction would be a violation of public faith. 
 
 It is plain, therefore, that the mere numbers of signers of 
 the petition is no proof whatever of any public necessity, nor 
 of the expediency of the grant,—but that the reasons they 
 assign are alone worthy of consideration. To them there¬ 
 fore let us look, and see their real value, and place them in 
 the scales against those of the remonstrants, and see which 
 preponderate. 
 
 But if regard is to be had to numbers of parties on the 
 respective sides, I array the inhabitants of Salem who have 
 property at stake which will be injured, and the thousands 
 of stockholders who have invested their property in this road, 
 relying upon the public faith—the widows, trustees, mechan¬ 
 ics, and people of small means, who have sought a safe and 
 profitable depository under the charter of the remonstrants— 
 and ask whether the claims of those who have actually paid 
 their money, and must lose it if a new road be made, are not 
 entitled to as much respect as those who have invested noth¬ 
 ing, and are only looking for profit 7 
 
11 
 
 Before, however, proceeding to the questions directly at 
 issue, it is proper to remind the Committee that it appears, 
 from various evidence, that these petitions were signed under 
 a general belief that the establishment of another road would 
 cause a lower rate of fares on both; and that this sufficiently 
 accounts for the facility with which subscribers were pro¬ 
 cured, who acted under that influence without reflection 
 upon the consequences to the rights of others, or any enlight¬ 
 ened and well considered views of public expediency, or even 
 of their own interest. 
 
 In the views which 1 ask leave to present, I shall first con¬ 
 sider the petition to be in effect for a new road from Salem 
 through Danvers, Lynn, and Saugus, to a junction with the 
 Boston Rail-road Extension Company, in Malden. Such 
 is the express prayer of the petition of David Pingree and 
 others, and all the others, being in aid of it, are to the same 
 effect. It is true, that the counsel has stated, that the Com¬ 
 mittee saw fit, after these petitions were presented to the 
 Legislature, to withdraw that portion which prays for a con¬ 
 nection with Salem. No proof of any such authority in the 
 Committee was adduced. We deny any such authority 
 on their part. The petitioners have never been called 
 together, since they subscribed, and the petition dele¬ 
 gates no such power. At the town meeting, where this 
 Committee was appointed, it has not been pretended, that 
 any thing was said about cutting off any part of the road. 
 The Committee had only general powers to manage the affair. 
 But these powers must have been to carry it through,—not 
 to mutilate and destroy. If the Committee could cut off 
 Salem, they may Lynn, Saugus, Boston. We deny, therefore, 
 the authority of the counsel to vary the petition, and we say 
 that it still is one from Salem; or else that there are no peti¬ 
 tioners before the Committee.' No persons have signed any 
 petition for a road from Danvers only. It is an entirely dis¬ 
 tinct proposition. 
 
 But, after all, it is plain from every thing in the case, and 
 the statement of the counsel and his witnesses, that this 
 striking off of Salem, is a mere pretence, and that a road 
 from Salem through Danvers is the real object in view. This 
 was sufficiently proved by the conduct of their leading wit- 
 
12 
 
 ness, Mr. Daniels, who, when repeatedly and earnestly inter¬ 
 rogated,—whether they would accept a charter with a condi¬ 
 tion contained in it, that the road should not he connected 
 with another to Salem,—refused to answer the question in 
 any other way than by saying, that they wanted one without 
 any restriction. And when the pressure upon the witness, to 
 answer the question plainly and fairly, became intolerable to 
 the counsel, he was compelled to say, that they would take 
 the charter, with such a condition, if obliged to, relying upon 
 a. belter Legislature next year to remove it. And as he is not 
 only counsel hut committee man and witness too, no doubt 
 can exist that connection with Salem is intended as essential 
 to their plan. This further appears from the whole current of 
 the testimony on the part of the petitioners, and the estimates 
 which they have put in; many of their witnesses, upon being 
 asked where the custom of .the road was to come from, enu¬ 
 merating Salem among the places; and the estimates contain¬ 
 ing Salem in express terms or by necessary implication. 
 
 Nor is the mode of accomplishing this, end any longer a 
 secret. It is not to be left dependent upon any future act of 
 the Legislature. The means are already in hand, and the ex¬ 
 amination of the gentleman in his capacity of witness, at the 
 close of the hearing, developed the whole scheme. It appears 
 that a corporation was established at the last session, author¬ 
 ized to construct a road .from Georgetown through Danvers 
 to Salem, with power to enter upon the road of the remon¬ 
 strants,—and if the parties cannot agree upon the terms, then 
 the Georgetown and Danvers Company may enter in such 
 manner as shall be most convenient for the public. Stat. 
 1844, chap. 141. 
 
 It further appears, that the gentleman, who is both of the 
 Committee and counsel in this case, and twelve others from 
 Danvers, are corporators in that charter; that they had a 
 meeting during the pendency of this petition, and before the 
 withdrawal of the connection of the road proposed with Sa¬ 
 lem ; and, to adopt his own expressive language, “ that they 
 will use. that charter as they may see fit in reference to this 
 eastern road; ” though, indeed, no such assurance could be 
 necessary,—for having the power, there could be no question 
 of their tention to use it. 
 
13 
 
 I shall have future occasion to advert to the consequences 
 of such connection, hut merely use these facts now, to estab¬ 
 lish the position, that the road intended to be obtained under 
 this petition, is substantially, and, in truth, one from Salem to 
 Boston, thus constituting a parallel road. And that the peti¬ 
 tioners rely upon withdrawing a very large, if not the chief 
 portion of the travel on the present road between Salem and 
 Boston, is clear, as their estimates are for all that the present 
 road now receives from, Danvers and the towns adjoining: a 
 great portion if not all of that from Lynn: and a large 
 amount from Salem. 
 
 A glance at the map, before the Committee, shows, that if 
 this road he established, it is a road from Salem, parallel, to all 
 intents and purposes, with the present road; taking pre¬ 
 cisely the same line of travel at the termini, and the same 
 intermediate travel; inasmuch as Danvers, being only two 
 miles from the principal depot, the travel and transportation 
 from that town, now goes necessarily by this. 
 
 And if the proposed road be united, as it is doubtless in¬ 
 tended to be, or certainly may be, with the Georgetown road, 
 and that should be extended to Newburyport, according to a 
 petition now pending, there will then be three parallel roads 
 through the County of Essex; one passing through all the 
 larger towns on the western side of the county; one through 
 those on the eastern line; and one through the centre, but 
 through no large town, excepting Danvers. 
 
 The consideration, therefore, of the policy of the State, in 
 establishing a system of parallel rail-roads, is now forced 
 upon the Committee as a matter which they are called upon 
 to decide. And no question of legislative policy, it is respect¬ 
 fully suggested, ever demanded more careful and deliberate 
 consideration. 
 
 And as their own interests are so deeply involved, the re¬ 
 monstrants hope that they shall not be thought obtrusive in 
 briefly suggesting the views they take of this subject. 
 
 We make, then, as our first point, that the grant of the 
 prayer of the petitioners is against public policy,—because it 
 seeks for the establishment of a road substantially parallel 
 with one now existing. 
 
14 
 
 The true policy in regard to this species of roads is of the 
 greatest moment. 
 
 There are two systems proposed to the Legislature, and its 
 election must be now made. A false step taken in this mat¬ 
 ter is utterly irretrievable, and will terminate either in the 
 utter loss of vast amounts of capital to those who shall in¬ 
 vest, or in imposing for ages upon the people, unnecessarily, 
 heavy taxation for this species of accommodation; in either 
 of which cases the loss to the public is the same, and is the 
 • whole amount thus injudiciously expended. 
 
 One mode is, to connect the distant points of the country, 
 East. West, North and South, together, by long lines or main 
 tracks as far as possible; and to have branches from them 
 connecting the towns and villages at moderate distances, as 
 the public wants and means may demand. By this mode, 
 all parts of the country would be connected; and the main 
 tracks being made the centres of transportation for neighbor¬ 
 hoods and for extremities of the country, the corporations 
 would be enabled to make greater outlays for convenience, 
 safety and despatch; and the preservation of their roads, 
 engines and cars in the best possible condition; and to avail 
 themselves of all improvements as fast as invented;—while 
 the sure result would be, a constant reduction of fares corres¬ 
 ponding with the increase of custom; thus securing conven¬ 
 ient, safe, speedy and cheap transportation of persons and 
 property to every part of the Commonwealth. The interests 
 of the corporations and of the public would be entirely coin¬ 
 cident ;—constant improvement in the facilities of travelling 
 and transportation of property, and economy, would be the 
 certain result; and no more capital would be expended in 
 the construction of roads and furnishing apparatus for running 
 upon them, than the public necessities should require. 
 
 But if parallel roads be established as a system, the conse¬ 
 quences must be entirely the reverse of all this. The paral¬ 
 lel roads must depend upon the same line of travel; and as 
 the two cannot accommodate more than one could do, the 
 whole capital in the construction aird furnishing of the second 
 is so much dead loss—as entirely so as if thrown into the 
 sea. It is entirely unlike other superfluous property, that 
 
15 
 
 can be sold when of no further use. The road can be appro¬ 
 priated for nothing else, and the capital expended in it is 
 buried there forever. And so every cent of increased expend¬ 
 iture in running upon the road, is equally thrown away, and 
 the public thus utterly loses a vast amount of property that 
 might otherwise be used for the advancement of its best in¬ 
 terests. Nor is this all, nor the worst. The greater the. num¬ 
 ber of roads dividing the travel, the greater must be the 
 expenses, not only in the original outlay, but of daily man¬ 
 agement ; and, of course, the less the perfection of the road, 
 and cars, and engines, the less frequency of communication 
 and a higher rate of fare. 
 
 This is the best that can be hoped, supposing both roads 
 to be able to stand, and that the competition end in a mutual 
 adjustment. Thus, suppose this new line established, and 
 with the same, rates of fare charged by the present road. There 
 is no reason to anticipate that there will be any essential in¬ 
 crease of transportation, and certainly none such as could 
 support the new road—independently of that to be withdrawn 
 from the old one; no one pretends it. What, then, must be 
 the consequence ? The profits of both, if divided, could not 
 enable either to make improvements,—to lay new tracks, or 
 incur any avoidable expenses for improvements of any sort. 
 The cars would gradually become comparatively incommo¬ 
 dious and unsafe, and would not be constantly refitted and 
 replaced by new ones as now; the engines would be run to 
 the last moment, and delays and dangers from their defects 
 would be frequent; the tracks would be less perfectly pre¬ 
 served and attended to; inferior men, at lower wages, would 
 gradually take place of the skilful and enterprising engineers 
 and conductors now employed, and a much smaller number 
 of trains would be run; and as the present full travel will do 
 but little, if any thing more, at the proposed reduced rates, 
 than pay simple interest on the amount now invested, there 
 could not be sufficient to pay any reasonable profit upon the 
 new capital, and one or both must be in greater or less de¬ 
 gree sacrificed, which is a dead loss to the public of just so 
 much property. And supposing the fares to be reduced 
 —what will the public gain? Will not the loss of the con¬ 
 venience and security of double tracks,—of commodious and 
 
16 
 
 often renewed cars,—excellent engines and able engineers,— 
 and of the frequency of communication and of capital stock, 
 be more than a counterbalance for any such saving of fare? 
 Taking, therefore, the best view possible, and is it not evi¬ 
 dent that this policy is ruinous to individuals, and destruc¬ 
 tive of the true interests of the people? 
 
 But this best side is far from being the most probable re¬ 
 sult ; for experience and history tell us that this sort of com¬ 
 petition usually ends in the destruction of the property of one 
 •party, and its absorption by the other—and a final raising of 
 the fares far beyond the amounts originally established. 
 Witness the New Jersey rail-roads and canals, conducting 
 passengers between New York and Philadelphia, of which 
 testimony has been given, where three competing corpora¬ 
 tions, after having reduced the rates of fare to almost nomi¬ 
 nal sums, and thus destroying themselves, have been at last 
 united in the hands of capitalists, and now press like an 
 incubus upon the public; making them pay a tax upon the 
 $13,000,0110 which all three have cost, instead of a fair sum of 
 about $3,000,000, for which one sufficient road could be built. 
 And take the proposed road and the present one, and put 
 them both in operation—and suppose the fare of the new line 
 to be reduced to twenty cents, and way travel in proportion. 
 Is it to be believed that the old road will stand by and see its 
 custom withdrawn ? Certainly not—but as is usual in such 
 cases, it will probably reduce its fare even lower; and thus 
 the other must be compelled to an equal or corresponding 
 greater reduction—and so they will proceed until one breaks 
 down, and the strongest will swallow up the weakest. Or a 
 combination between the two will take place, and then, hav¬ 
 ing the possession of both roads, and the public in its power, 
 the fares will be raised high enough to pay a high profit on 
 the cost of both—or to indemnify the victor for the losses 
 sustained in the contest. And all of which will come out of 
 the people for whose especial benefit it was instituted. Nor 
 is this all,—during the heat of the battle there will be much 
 danger from the efforts to outstrip each other in speed, and 
 many valuable lives may be lost, that no pecuniary gain 
 could compensate for. 
 
17 
 
 Again, if the proposed road be established, the directors of 
 the Eastern road must now keep up the present rate of fares 
 as long as possible, all through, in order to defray their ex¬ 
 penses and pay interest on their capital. And afterwards, if 
 obliged to reduce that between Salem and Boston, to com¬ 
 pete with the new road, they must keep up that on other 
 parts of the line; and so the country below Salem be com¬ 
 pelled to pay higher rates for the sake of the people of Dan¬ 
 vers. 
 
 On the other hand, if the system we contend for be sus¬ 
 tained, it will enable the long lines continually to reduce their 
 fares until they arrive at the lowest practicable minimum;— 
 to make double tracks throughout;—to run trains every hour, 
 if public convenience shall require it:—to run branches to 
 every town whose wants and transportation will warrant the 
 expenditure for a few miles of road ;—to furnish the most 
 commodious cars, with all improvements as fast as invented; 
 the fleetest engines; the most skilful engineers; and civil and 
 accommodating conductors •—and to make all the arrange¬ 
 ments which time and experience shall suggest, for improv¬ 
 ing the accommodations of the public in this most important 
 branch of public accommodation. 
 
 We believe this view alone decisive of the question before 
 the Committee. No conceivable benefit to be secured to the 
 town of Danvers, and the little village of Saugus, can out¬ 
 weigh the enormous public evils that must grow out of the 
 establishment of a system of parallel rail-roads. And no 
 case can ever be presented to the Legislature.where less cause 
 for it can be shown than here. If this petition be granted, 
 there can be no reason for refusing every other, and the sys¬ 
 tem will have become established, and the future progress of 
 
 Apart, however, from these general considerations, and in 
 reference to the particular merits of the case in hand, the 
 two great questions that present themselves are:— 
 
 I. Whether any such public exigency exists as will justify 
 the Legislature in granting a charter for another rail-road 
 from Salem, through Lynn to Boston 1 
 3 
 
18 • 
 
 II. Whether such a charter can be granted consistently 
 with a just regard for the interests of these remonstrants, and 
 the good faith of the State? 
 
 1st. Is there any public exigency that will warrant the 
 Legislature in granting a charter for another road from Salem 
 to Boston 7 
 
 That a public exigency must exist, and that it must be of 
 a clear and indisputable nature, to justify the exercise of the 
 powers vested in the Legislature for this purpose, has been 
 so recently and fully recognized by this Committee, and unan¬ 
 imously too, that comment upon the subject would be super¬ 
 fluous, if not arrogant. I refer to the report upon the peti¬ 
 tion of Mr. Livingston and others, Senate document, 1S45, 
 No. 30, pp. 4, 5. And this Committee has decided that there 
 can be no such exigency where an existing rail-road furnishes 
 substantial accommodation to the public: and that, in esti¬ 
 mating that accommodation, all necessary deductions for in¬ 
 juries which the new road might occasion to the proprietors 
 of other rail-roads and other interests are to be made. 
 
 What, then, are the fads existing here, tending to prove 
 or disprove the existence of such agency 7 
 
 In the first place, there is already established a direct rail¬ 
 road from Salem through Lynn to Boston; and within two 
 miles of the centre of the village of South Danvers, to which 
 a spur is proposed to be constructed. This road is of excel¬ 
 lent and safe construction, with double tracks for a great por¬ 
 tion of the way; say two thirds, and with a prospect of hav¬ 
 ing them throughout, if it be not interfered with. The trans¬ 
 portation is as rapid, and safe, and frequerft, as that upon 
 any o'hsr road in the country. More frequent than between 
 any other termini of equal distance, being statedly seven 
 times every day, nearly twice as frequent as any other. The 
 safety of the road is unparalleled in rail-road history. The 
 number of miles run since the opening, is 944,331. Number 
 of passengers, 2,714,855, and not one instance of serious injury 
 has occurred. The punctuality has been remarkable, not¬ 
 withstanding the occasional detentions incident to all roads, 
 and some which have been peculiar to this. The fare has 
 never approached the amount which the Legislature thought 
 
19 
 
 reasonable when granting the charter; has not as yet given 
 6 per cent, upon the investment, and was intended to be 
 reduced before the investment was made, and will be so, 
 unless the action of the Legislature should oblige the corpo¬ 
 ration to retain the present rates in self-defence. The road 
 could safely and conveniently accommodate ten times the 
 transportation that now passes, over it, or more. While the 
 proposed road could not carry passengers or freight more 
 quickly, frequently, or safely, between Salem, Lynn, and 
 Boston; would require an outlay of at least $270,000; the 
 appropriation of large amounts of private property; with¬ 
 draw a great portion of the fares from the present road, and 
 reduce the value of its stock,—and so indirectly take from 
 others a valuable and great pecuniary interest. And in connec¬ 
 tion with the Georgetown road, for which a charter already ex - 
 ists, would make three rail-roads through the county of Essex. 
 
 What, then, is the real and substantial accommodation 
 which is to be furnished to the public,—which the existing 
 roads do not give; and which will warrant the exercise of 
 the highest and most arbitrary power possessed by any gov¬ 
 ernment ; and the destruction of property belonging to these 
 remonstrants, to an untold amount 1 And do the petitioners 
 make out a clear and indisputable case of public necessity, 
 such as this Committee has declared to be necessary 1 
 
 The leading facts relied upon, are, 1st. The accommodation 
 of the inhabitants of Danvers. 2d. And the accommodation 
 of the inhabitants of Saugus. 3d. And the accommodation 
 of the eastern population, by the substitution of an entrance 
 by means of a bridge; in place of the ferry which connects 
 the present road with the city. 
 
 With regard to the accommodation of the inhabitants of 
 Danvers. Of the claims of that town to rail-road accommo¬ 
 dation, no denial is made or intended. The highly respecta¬ 
 ble and industrious inhabitants of that place, certainly deserve 
 a full share of the favors of the State; as they enjoy that of 
 the respect and confidence of all portions of the people, and 
 of none more than of those interested in this remonstrance. 
 But it is very manifest that there is no necessity for another 
 
20 
 
 rail-road from Danvers, through Lynn and Saugus to Boston, 
 to give them this accommodation. They can he furnished 
 with all reasonable accommodation , at very far less expense, 
 and with no sacrifice of the rights or interests of others. 
 
 A branch from Danvers to Salem, with cars to meet the 
 regular trains, would give all reasonable facility and despatch; 
 and this the remonstrants have ever been willing to construct, 
 and crave leave to construct, in one of the petitions now be¬ 
 fore the Committee. 
 
 If there were any reasonable pretence, that the public ac¬ 
 commodation required a rail-road from Danvers to Boston,— 
 it does not require and would not justify one like that pro¬ 
 posed. But it is apparent from the evidence, that the public 
 accommodation does not require any such new road, but that 
 the proposed branch from Danvers to Salem, will serve all 
 reasonable purposes. 
 
 It cannot, in the nature of things, be, that every town can 
 be accommodated with a separate road to the metropolis,— 
 merely because that would be the most convenient and desir¬ 
 able for that town. Such a doctrine would lead to the loss 
 of vast amounts of capital uselessly invested in parallel roads, 
 and to a corresponding increase of the rates of fares upon all 
 adjacent roads to pay for it. The true principle, as I have 
 attempted to shew, is to afford every town reasonable accom¬ 
 modation : and when this can be done by connecting it by a 
 convenient branch with a neighboring main road, such a 
 proceeding is the most beneficial, not only to the public, but 
 eventually to the town in question, as securing a much cheaper 
 rate of transportation than could otherwise be possible. 
 
 The Eastern Rail-road Corporation have been for some 
 time willing to build a branch for the accommodation of Dan¬ 
 vers. This will give to that town all the facilities that can 
 be reasonably demanded; will enable them to reach Boston, 
 it is believed, quite as speedily as they could by any new 
 road, if not more so; and three times oftener each day than 
 they propose by such new road. 
 
 What, then, are the proposed advantages to be derived to 
 the people of Danvers from a separate road to Boston, on one 
 hand, and the probable disadvantages and losses to them- 
 selyes, and other persons, and the public, on the other 1 Let 
 
21 
 
 us see whether the balance constitutes a “clear and indisputa¬ 
 ble public necessity and convenience,” within the rule, as 
 laid down by this Committee. 
 
 The proposed advantages are said to be, 1st, Saving of 
 time. 2d. Saving of expense; and 3d. The ferry. 
 
 Admitting, for the sake of the argument, which we deny, 
 that there would he a saving of a few minutes in time, and it 
 could not amount to more, is that such a public necessity 
 as warrants the outlay of $270,000, with incidental charges 
 and expenses of $40,000 per year for running the road. How 
 many persons would be thus benefited ? Whose time saved 
 would be worth that amount of money ? 
 
 And is the rule to be, that a main road is to be built for 
 every considerable town to the metropolis, because it would 
 be the saving of a few minutes of time to its inhabitants,— 
 more than could be saved by connecting them with some 
 other main road already existing very near to them? If so, 
 where are we to stop, and how are the rights of precedence 
 to be determined ? and why must we not have as many rail¬ 
 roads to the metropolis, as there are considerable towns in 
 the- State ? And what is to support them, unless high fares 
 be charged on each; and if higher fares take place, do they 
 not more than outweigh the time saved? The benefit of sav¬ 
 ing of time, therefore, though undoubtedly of some import¬ 
 ance in all cases, can of itself, in this, constitute no such 
 palpable public necessity as would justify this great outlay. 
 The time lost, if any, Avould be far more than counterbalanced 
 by the additional expenditure in constructing and running 
 the new road. 
 
 2d. As to saving of expense.—Admit that one will take 
 place; must it not be by taking the income from the present 
 road? And is that income now, more than is reasonable 
 upon the investment ? And is it not earned by faithful ser¬ 
 vice ? And is it a public necessity to take property from one 
 class of men for the purpose of giving it to another ? But, 
 supposing this saving to take place and to be permanent, and 
 what does it amount to ? How much per annum ? And 
 how does it compare, with interest, on the proposed invest¬ 
 ment of $270,000, and $40,000 per year for running the road? 
 But it clearly appears, that there can be no such saving, and 
 
that the new road will not and cannot carry passengers or 
 freight more cheaply than they are now proposed to be carried 
 over the existing one after the expiration of this month. 
 
 Indeed, from the testimony of the counsel himself, as well 
 as the whole current of evidence, it is preposterous to contend 
 that any public necessity exists, that would justify the grant 
 of another road through, or from Danvers to Boston, unless 
 the avoidance of the ferry can be so considered. So that the 
 whole question is reduced to this,—whether the alleged in¬ 
 conveniences of the ferry to the inhabitants of Danvers and 
 Lynn, are such as to justify the outlay of a capital of $270,000, 
 and the additional unnecessary annual expenditure of at least 
 $30,000, being equivalent to a capital of $500,OOOmore to avoid 
 it 1 For as there will obviously be very little increase of trans¬ 
 portation,—if the new road be established,—and that now 
 existing will be at the same expenses as how, nearly all the 
 cost of running the new one will be so much lost or uselessly 
 expended: and that amount could not be less than $30,000 out 
 of the $40,000 or $50,000 that would be thus appropriated. 
 
 We come, then, to the consideration of the subject of the 
 Ferry, about which there has been so much of declamation, 
 and concerning which the petitioners have raked up every 
 unfavorable accident and disaster that has occurred since its 
 establishment, with a zeal and industry that can leave no 
 doubt that every thing ill has been told that can be, and that 
 the extreme worst is before the Committee. And what does 
 it amount to 1 To nothing more than that, during a period 
 of nine years, there have been occasionally, in the severest 
 storms and frosts of winter, some delays of short duration, 
 and one or two instances in which the boat could not cross 
 by reason of ice, and now and then a detention of a few 
 minutes by the passing of vessels across the mouth of the 
 ferry slips; while the general regularity and punctuality of 
 the boat at all seasons, and in 999 times out of a 1000 at the 
 least, is proved beyond all controversy. 
 
 The course pursued by the petitioners in seeking for and 
 introducing evidence upon this point, is most remarkable, 
 and strikingly illustrative of the utter futility and absurdity 
 of their objection. The counsel, in his opening, endeavored 
 to pre-occupy the minds of the Committee by a most florid 
 
and declamatory statement that passengers were tumbled into 
 a boat, and tossed up and down among the ice and waves— 
 losing their way in the fogs, drawn out by ropes, and 
 squeezed together in a narrow passage, and with no opportu¬ 
 nity of taking seats in the cars; and concluded by averring, 
 that the people whom he represented had rather pay a rea¬ 
 sonable price for their female friends, than be ferried across 
 this Gulf for nothing; and, instead of confining their proofs 
 to the present state of the ferry and its admirable accommo¬ 
 dations—which alone are the proper subjects of considera¬ 
 tion—the petitioners have gone back to the days when the 
 Rail-road Corporation had no exclusive ferry of its own; 
 when the boats were infinitely inferior; the slips of a totally 
 different construction; and every thing comparatively less 
 commodious; and having raked up every petty accident or 
 annoyance that then occurred, have arrayed it in glowing 
 colors as if illustrative of the present state of things. While 
 the counsel for Mr. Valentine and others, not being willing 
 to be outstripped in' the race, has assured the Committee, 
 that a ferry is a mere relic of past civilization, unworthy 
 the age in which we live —an entirely obsolete idea ; and as¬ 
 cending the region of poetry, has described it as fit only as a 
 place of torment for damned spirits. The views presented 
 by both counsel are equally sound and reasonable, and enti¬ 
 tled to equal respect, and serve to show how far prejudice 
 and poetry can warp the judgment, and blind it to the truth. 
 
 It is, indeed, rather amusing for the advocate of a Chelsea 
 petition to talk of a ferry as an obsolete idea, when, upon his 
 own statement, that place owes all its prosperity to a ferry, 
 and has increased ip population under its influences at the 
 rate of twenty per cent, a year; and with New York and 
 Brooklyn almost in sight, connected by ferries far inferior to 
 this, by means of which a country village has grown into a 
 large and populous city; and with East Boston in sight of 
 the house in which we stand, with its busy population, and 
 numerous houses and workshops, erected or in process of 
 erection, and yearly multiplying, if not doubling, and all 
 owing to this same ferry. 
 
 It is in evidence that, at the first establishment of the road, 
 the corporation owning no slips, and having no right to run 
 
24 
 
 a ferry-boat independently of the ferry company, made ar¬ 
 rangements for the use of their slips and boats, -which were 
 then considered as excellent and well adapted for the service; 
 —but that many inconveniences were soon perceived, and 
 improvements suggested by the difficulties they encountered, 
 all of which led to constant and gradual improvements, until 
 the increase of their business, and their knowledge acquired 
 by this experience, enabled them to build the present safe 
 and commodious slips, and ways, and magnificent boat, 
 which combined exceed, as we are told by witnesses who 
 have travelled extensively, any ferry in the world.—and for 
 the procuring of which they have expended about $200,000. 
 
 And if the inquiry be confined to the detentions or discom¬ 
 forts experienced since the present establishment went into 
 operation, it is hazarding nothing to say, that at no depot or 
 station in any rail-road in the Commonwealth has there been 
 fewer detentions, or accidents, or inconveniences; and that 
 no equal space of road, approaching a central depot, has been 
 travelled over with fewer detentions. That from the ice has 
 been almost exclusively during the extreme severity of a 
 fortnight in February, 1844, when the steamer was cut out, 
 and was occasioned by the floating ice let loose by that oper¬ 
 ation—this boat having, until now, kept her own channel 
 clear during the whole time, notwithstanding that every 
 other part of the harbor was frozen up. And even during 
 that fortnight, although there were occasional detentions, as 
 testified to by some witnesses, it appears that others passed 
 every day without detention or interruption. And the utmost 
 that has been proved this winter is a detention of ten minutes 
 by ice floating into the slip. . 
 
 And so as to detentions by vessels. I submit that the 
 weight of evidence shows them to be actually unworthy of 
 serious consideration—happening sometimes not for three 
 months together, and at others very seldom, generally of 
 three or four minutes duration only, and never more than 
 ten at the most. 
 
 Can any road, with a single track, be pointed out where 
 the delays are not greater, for the mere purpose of awaiting 
 the arrival of other trains 1 The experienced witnesses ex¬ 
 amined on this point settle it conclusively in favor of the 
 
Eastern road. And as to the detentions by ice,—in addition 
 to the proof of its infrequent occurrence, it is known that an 
 iron steamboat is to he furnished and run in the harbor here¬ 
 after, for the express purpose, among others, of breaking up 
 the ice, and preventing its opposing any obstacle to the pas¬ 
 sage of vessels. The whole testimony upon this subject must 
 aiford to any impartial mind entire satisfaction that this objec¬ 
 tion exists in the imagination rather than in any substantial 
 reality. We appeal to the personal observation of this Com¬ 
 mittee for judgment of the nature of this ferry and its accom¬ 
 modations. We have proved that, with this boat and these 
 slips, no storm was ever known that would prevent her safe 
 passage and the safe landing of her passengers; and that her 
 punctuality is almost perfect in all weathers and seasons; 
 while the passenger is alike and perfectly protected from the 
 weather or the heat, both while on board and in passing to 
 and from her. 
 
 But as the detentions are the principal subject of complaint, 
 it may be worth while to consider what would possibly be 
 gained by the proposed new route, in security or punctuality. 
 The new route crosses two or more streams by bridges, con¬ 
 taining at least five draws; through one of these draws ves¬ 
 sels pass over six thousand times annually; through another 
 over six thousand times annually, in seven months; and 
 through the others more or less frequently, and through some 
 of them very often. Now is it, by any means, certain that 
 the detentions from these causes will not very far exceed 
 those of the ferry-boat by the ice or vessels crossing the ferry 
 slips ? The experiment has not yet been tried. The proba¬ 
 bility seems to be that detentions at these draws must be fre¬ 
 quent, and very far beyond those at the ferry. One draw 
 must average at least twenty times a day—and the proof in 
 the case is, that it has been raised seventy times in one day. 
 The other must average nearly thirty times a day for seven 
 months in the year; making together an average of fifty 
 times every day, and sometimes one hundred per day—and 
 add seven only per day for the other three days, and we have 
 a daily average of fifty-seven. The chances we say are, 
 therefore, greatly in favor of the ferry. But that is not all. 
 The time to be lost in one case is far more uncertain than in 
 
the other. The detentions of the ferry, by vessels across the 
 path or slips, are proved to be very uniform, three or four 
 minutes only; while those by vessels passing draws are very 
 uncertain, necessarily depending upon the size of the vessel 
 and liability to get caught in the draw, or to get aground. 
 
 And as to the safety in these emergencies, the ferry-boat is 
 never exposed to the slightest danger by these detentions, 
 while the trains may be exposed to much in passing draws; 
 for if the train be not stopped seasonably or be started too soon, 
 or any accident or mistake occur, the consequences might be 
 most disastrous. The testimony of Mr. Lee, the super¬ 
 intendent of the Providence road, on this point, is deserving 
 great consideration, who states that, in a harbor crowded as 
 this is with vessels passing to and fro continually, he should 
 think a ferry safer than a bridge, through the draws of which 
 they must pass; and instanced a case in the Providence 
 road where a train went through a draw, by reason of a mis¬ 
 take or accident in its management. 
 
 At any rate, as the experiment is soon to be tried, on a road 
 recently built, and has not yet been, it certainly would be 
 well to await the result; and not expend $270,000 to avoid 
 the delays of a ferry, and find after all that greater ones were 
 incurred by the change. 
 
 But a slight reference to the facts in proof show that nothing 
 can be more obviously delusive than any expectation of sav¬ 
 ing time by the proposed new road. The route from Dan¬ 
 vers Would be at least 16J miles long, being rather longer 
 than by a spur, to Salem, connecting with the present road; 
 so that the only possible saving of time would be in the avoid¬ 
 ing of the 5 or 6 minutes extra time taken in crossing the 
 ferry. This would, probably, be more than counterbalanced 
 in the long run, by the detentions at the draws,—even if the 
 locomotives were to proceed on to the track of the Boston and 
 Maine Road. But, although that arrangement was antici¬ 
 pated and understood to be assented to, it turns out to be an 
 entire mistake, and that none such has been or ever can be 
 made: but that the cars must be detached from the locomo¬ 
 tive at the junction, and be attached to one, or some train of 
 cars running on the main road; and this will cause far greater 
 delay than the ferry at every trip. And unless the Boston 
 
27 
 
 and Maine road will run a special engine, which cannot be 
 reasonably expected, the passengers will have the further 
 delay of awaiting the arrival of the corresponding trains of 
 the Boston and Maine road, before they can proceed. These 
 causes of detention, or either of them alone, will cause con¬ 
 siderable and very uncertain degrees of delay, as the experi¬ 
 ence at the junction of the Boston and Lowell road has shewn, 
 the proof of which this Committee must well remember; and 
 adding to this the delays at the draivs, and, the crossing of 
 the two rail-road tracks , which are passed after leaving Mal¬ 
 den, and which must not unfrequently require the trains to 
 stop or slacken their speed; and no one can doubt that there 
 would be far more punctuality, and speed, and certainty over 
 the present road than over that proposed. 
 
 If this ferry caused any want of punctuality in general, it 
 could easily have been shewn, but the contrary has been 
 abundantly proved. And the remonstrants challenge inquiry 
 into the comparative punctuality of their trains, with those 
 upon any road that runs from Boston. 
 
 It is further objected, that the ferry is disagreeable to la¬ 
 dies, and renders their use of the road inconvenient, exposing 
 them to unpleasant contact with a crowd, in passing to and 
 from the boat. No ladies have testified to this point; and I 
 believe that, if the ladies of Danvers and Lynn had been here, 
 to listen to the testimony of the gentlemen from those towns, 
 they would have laughed in their faces. All of us who have 
 friends in that part of the country, and frequent occasion to 
 cross the ferry, and travel in those trains, and who have 
 wives, and daughters, and female friends, who pass up and 
 down, constantly unattended, know the absurdity of these 
 statements. Some of us, indeed, who have the good fortune 
 to be connected with families in Salem and Danvers, must 
 infer that our female friends are less delicate and sensitive 
 than the ladies of Lynn and Danvers,—if they would author¬ 
 ize such objections as have been here represented. But we 
 have no belief that any sensible and delicate woman from 
 Danvers or anywhere else, has ever found any cause of 
 anxiety or complaint, unless, indeed, on some occasion when 
 a great crowd exposed every one to annoyance. And for the 
 credit of the gentlemen of Danvers and Lynn, we must mis- 
 
28 
 
 trust their own statements, when they tell us that they have 
 frequently seen ladies pass from one car to another, unable to 
 find seats. No, sir, that cannot be true. And, undoubtedly, 
 experience will dictate and suggest means of remedying the 
 trifling inconveniences now incurred, by setting apart sepa¬ 
 rate cars for ladies, or by new ticket arrangements. 
 
 These are all the objections that have been urged against 
 this ferry, and when carefully examined, they prove almost 
 utterly insignificant. And the probability is, that no way 
 can now be found, so easy, safe, and expeditious, of getting 
 from that part of the country by rail-road, as across this 
 ferry. If the remonstrants had pursued the course taken by 
 the petitioners, in hunting up every accident and detention 
 that had occurred upon any other rail-road in the State, at 
 any important station, from their beginnings through their 
 various advancements, in skill, and care, and accommoda¬ 
 tions, and compare them with those at this ferry, it is believed 
 that the result would be vastly in its favor. 
 
 It is not to be denied, that a ferry is less convenient and 
 punctual than a solid and uninterrupted road would be. But 
 we do deny, that it is. less so than two or more bridges, with 
 five or more draws, which must be opened daily from fifty to 
 an hundred times; and assert that it is far more safe. But, 
 taking into view all the disadvantages that have been enu¬ 
 merated, or can be reasonably supposed, there are, on the 
 other side, some peculiar benefits and pleasures. In the 
 pleasant months of the year,—this short passage across one 
 of the most beautiful harbors in the world,—witli the city, 
 the shipping, the navy yard, and ships of war in the stream, 
 and the beautiful scenery surrounding on every side, all in 
 full view, and the busy ferry and steamboats plying to and 
 fro, is a most delightful and refreshing change from the dust 
 and heat of the city, as you leave it,—and from the confine¬ 
 ment and fatigue of the ride in the cars, as you approach it. 
 It is a positive luxury, which one might seek and pay for, 
 for its own sake. While the opportunity of seeing persons, 
 and selecting your companion for the journey, or interchang¬ 
 ing friendly salutations, or of making business appointments 
 or negotiations, is, as has been fully proved by many wit¬ 
 nesses, a great advantage, peculiar to this arrangement. 
 
29 
 
 But the question of the convenience or inconvenience of 
 this ferry, and of its comparative advantages or disadvan¬ 
 tages over the proposed new road, is not matter of specula¬ 
 tion and opinion. It has been fully and fairly tried and set¬ 
 tled, and the popular vote of those interested is decidedly in 
 favor of the ferry. It is proved that this Eastern road and 
 that of the Boston and Maine Rail-road Company, unite at 
 South Berwick, so that travellers from Portland and Saco, and 
 places eastwardly of them, have their choice to come by this 
 road, with its ferry, or to go by the Maine road, which comes 
 in at the depot of the Lowell road; and that more than three 
 fourths take this Eastern road. This is conclusive of the 
 fact that no practical inconvenience is sustained by the cross¬ 
 ing the ferry, or that, if any he so, it is more than counterbal¬ 
 anced by the advantages; and would it not he preposterous 
 in face of this practical fact, to build a new road, at enormous 
 expense, to counteract a supposed evil, which the travelling 
 public thus demonstrate that they would not take such other 
 route to avoid 1 
 
 Nor ought this subject to be passed by without noticing 
 the absurdity of the pretences of the people of Danvers on 
 this subject, who now object to this short and convenient 
 ferry as sufficient cause for an entire new road; hut who, 
 when the subject was before the Legislature in 1836, unitedly 
 petitioned in favor of one across the Winnisimet ferry, three 
 times as long, over shoal water, and exposed to an hundred 
 detentions and inconveniences where this is to one. It ap¬ 
 pears by the Senate document (No. 79) of 1836, page 11, 
 that the inhabitants of Danvers, at a large meeting, unani¬ 
 mously adopted resolutions in favor of the route across Win¬ 
 nisimet ferry, and never intimated any other desire, al¬ 
 though the subject of a route through Charlestown and 
 another further west, to unite with the Lowell road, were 
 both under consideration. And some of the very witnesses, 
 Avho now appear to testify so strongly, were among the pe¬ 
 titioners for that very route. Mr. Robert S. Daniels, who 
 testified that he believes he did not sign a petition for this 
 route, but for one through Charlestown, appears, as I am in- 
 • formed, at the head of one of the petitions in favor of the 
 Winnisimet route; and Messrs. Allen, Marsh, Upton, Poor, 
 
30 
 
 and Abel Proctor, are also petitioners for the same road— 
 while Mr. Andrews, Breed, and Mr. Marsh, who are now so 
 earnest for the new road, being owners of estates in Lynn, 
 near the proposed depot, then opposed any rail-road what¬ 
 ever. So the people of Beverly are reported to have been 
 almost unanimously in favor of this route, (page 11;) and 
 that the inhabitants of Lynn generally preferred it. (page 8.) 
 
 Now it cannot be pretended that the inconveniences of the 
 ferry have proved greater than were anticipated, for the con¬ 
 trary is notoriously true. (Report, p. 13.) Great improve¬ 
 ments have been constantly suggested, and adopted as fast as 
 proposed, and will continue to be so until perfection be at¬ 
 tained, if that be practicable. We have, therefore, the posi¬ 
 tive proof of the petitioners themselves, and the still stronger 
 evidence of the great mass of the travelling public, that this 
 ferry is not obnoxious to any serious practical objection, and 
 that the cry now attempted to be raised against it is to be 
 looked upon as a mere effort for effect, to accomplish another 
 purpose, and not entitled to be considered as any reason for 
 granting the prayer of this petition. 
 
 An attempt has been made to put forth the advantages of 
 a change in the depot by the substitution of that of the Ex¬ 
 tension Company, in the Haymarket, for that now occupied 
 by the remonstrants, as a reason for the new road. This, as 
 a reason for granting a new road, seems too futile and absurd 
 for sober consideration. If a new road is to be granted to 
 every town or region now having one, because a more con¬ 
 venient depot can be selected, what is to be the consequence 1 
 Shall one be granted for Lowell, or Worcester, or Provi¬ 
 dence, because depots nearer to the centre of the city can be 
 obtained'? The present depot of this road is directly in the 
 heart of the mercantile business of the city. No better one, 
 for the freight of the eastern country, or accommodation of 
 men of business, can be pointed out. It is directly at the 
 spot where the shipments of the shoes from Lynn, &c. are 
 made, and presents facilities for depositing heavy freight at 
 the depot, for vessels, possessed by no other road in the city. 
 The Committee cannot surely consider this a grave objection 
 to this road, but, properly viewed, the present depot must be 
 esteemed a very great public advantage. 
 
31 
 
 Further, I submit that the great expenditures made by this 
 company for the public accommodation at the ferry, entitles 
 them to the favorable consideration of the Legislature. The 
 Legislature having decided that a ferry was a proper mode 
 of accomodating the public, the company might have re¬ 
 mained with the old one as it was, and with the boats ordi¬ 
 narily used as ferry boats here and elsewhere, and which 
 satisfy public expectation. But animated by an earnest de¬ 
 sire to render this mode of transportation as convenient and 
 agreeable as possible, and remove every reasonable objection, 
 and prove their desire faithfully to serve the public under 
 their charter, the company has expended over $200,000, in 
 new ferry ways, boat, depot, &c. So that the passenger 
 now passes from the car or the reception-room under cover, 
 into a boat more like a saloon than an ordinary ferry boat, 
 and from the boat to the car, in not only perfect security 
 from the weather, but in perfect comfort. And it would be a 
 great hardship if the public, after adopting this as a proper 
 mode of conveyance, and thus inducing the stockholders to 
 expend these great sums to make it as perfect as possible, 
 should now render it altogether valueless by substituting 
 another road for the mere purpose of avoiding it. 
 
 But we contend that this question is not only practically 
 settled by the voice of the travelling public, manifested in 
 their choice of this route, but that it has been once judicially 
 settled by the Legislature itself, and ought not now to be 
 again agitated. The history of the establishment of this 
 road is very instructive on this point, and we think should 
 be conclusive. By the Senate document referred to, it ap¬ 
 pears that when this charter was granted, the whole subject 
 was before the Committee during an unexampled length of 
 time—there being, as I am informed, eighteen sessions. There 
 were no less than thirty-four petitions and memorials from 
 different towns and persons including Salem, Lynn and Dan¬ 
 vers. Avast deal of. testimony was adduced on all sides. 
 It appears by the report to the Legislature, that the route by 
 this ferry, and one through Chelsea by the Winnisimet ferry, 
 and one through Charlestown by the Navy yard, and an¬ 
 other by the way of Charlestown neck to the depot of the 
 Lowell road, were all subjects of examination. The subject 
 
32 
 
 was most elaborately discussed, and after a full and thorough 
 investigation, this route was selected as the best for the pub¬ 
 lic by the Committee, and fully approved and adopted by the 
 Legislature. And we submit that the question having been 
 once settled, ought to be considered as conclusively deter¬ 
 mined. That it is of dangerous tendencjr and subversive of 
 all reasonable security, to have it again agitated, and par¬ 
 ticularly when so large an amount of capital has been in¬ 
 vested on the faith of this decision. It was then emphatical¬ 
 ly decided that the public exigency did not render necessary 
 a bridge, or entrance by way of Charlestown, to avoid this 
 ferry. But that this ferry would afford all the accommoda¬ 
 tion that the public exigencies and convenience required, 
 and it is, therefore, a solemnly settled question. It was, too, 
 a settlement of a question of property, for it was upon the 
 faith of, and in consideration of that settlement, that this 
 vast amount of money was expended. 
 
 If the views suggested are correct, we have entirely dis¬ 
 posed of the question of public exigency, and proved that 
 there could be no saving of time, expense, or inconvenience, 
 in any degree commensurate with the loss to the public in 
 the expenses of building and maintaining another road, and 
 injuries that would ensue from it to the property of the re¬ 
 monstrants. And if this be so, there is an end of the case, as 
 the absence of a public exigency is the absence of power in 
 the Legislature to grant the prayer of the petitioners. But 
 there are other very important considerations affecting this 
 question, which it is desirable to keep in view, and to which 
 I now ask the attention of the Committee. 
 
 And first, as to the policy and propriety of cutting off from 
 the present road any portion of its custom, considered in ref¬ 
 erence to its claims and interests as a long road extending 
 from the city to a great distance into the State of Maine. 
 And I beg to press this view most earnestly upon the atten¬ 
 tion of the Committee, as one of paramount importance at 
 this crisis of rail-road legislation. 
 
 The establishment of any new road, to cut off’ any essen¬ 
 tial part of the transportation.—-which was relied upon as the 
 means of making this long one from Salem to the eastward 
 profitable ,—would be alike injurious to the proprietors and to 
 
33 
 
 the public. I do not propose to put this view on the strict 
 ground of vested rights, which seem to be becoming so un¬ 
 popular, but solely on those of public policy and paternal 
 justice, considering the Legislature as a wise parent, who, 
 however supreme his authority, will dispense his favors with 
 regard to his children’s good, and the preservation of their 
 confidence in his justice as well as in his liberality. 
 
 Now, nothing is more obvious than this, that the calcula¬ 
 tions and expectations upon the faith of which long lines are 
 established, embrace not merely the regions of the extremi¬ 
 ties, which they are to unite , but also the intermediate adja¬ 
 cent regions through which they pass. And that it is essen¬ 
 tial to their establishment and existence, that the custom 
 which may be reasonably attracted to them by convenient 
 spurs and branches, should not be drawn away by new and 
 independent roads. Whenever a long line is projected, its 
 resources for custom are formed not merely at the termini, 
 but in the anticipated receipts from the towns and villages in 
 the neighborhood of which it runs. And it is well known 
 that many miles must prove unprofitable, so far as the local 
 travel of the neighborhood is concerned; and that the calcu¬ 
 lation is, to make up for the losses there by the profits of 
 other portions of the road, where it enters a denser popula¬ 
 tion. But if every considerable town or village is to have a 
 distinct road of its own to the metropolis, or to every neigh¬ 
 boring town, it is obvious that no long line now existing can 
 continue, and that no new ones will be constructed. 
 
 Take the Western road for example. There can be no 
 doubt that, if no road existed between Springfield and Wor¬ 
 cester, the public accommodation would require one; and 
 that one could now be built much cheaper than the cost of 
 the present one; and there is now as much claim for one, 
 considering the town of Springfield alone , as there is for Sa¬ 
 lem to have another to Boston. But if one were built, who 
 does not see that it would go near to annihilate the Western 
 road. But if the passengers from Hartford, and from New 
 York by way of New Haven and Hartford, and for North¬ 
 ampton, were to come here in hundreds, and tell you that the 
 fare on the Western road, between Springfield and Worces¬ 
 ter, is too high,—and that it is kept up merely to sustain the 
 
34 
 
 rest of the Western road,—and that a road from Springfield 
 to Worcester can now be built for half of the cost of the pres¬ 
 ent one, and run at half the rate of fare,—what answer could 
 you make 7 Would you not at once reply:—All this may be 
 true,—but when we granted the charter of the Western road 
 we included the route between Springfield and Worcester as 
 one part of it. We knew that the projectors relied upon that 
 portion of the route as one of the principal means of making 
 the whole road valuable,—that they would, not have taken a 
 charter for a road from the line to Springfield only,—and that 
 to grant you another road would be to take from them one of 
 the chief reliances upon which they depended, and upon the 
 faith of which they have expended their money, in levelling 
 the mountains and filling the valleys between the Connecticut 
 and the Hudson. Nor do we see any force in your repre¬ 
 sentation that you can now build one cheaper, or carry at 
 cheaper rates of fare;—if roads can be built cheaper now, it 
 is because you are enabled to profit by the skill and experi¬ 
 ence, and knowledge which those who first took the hazard 
 of building have acquired for you and the public:—it is 
 enough that we have the benefit of that in building new 
 roads, not interfering with others. We should hold it base 
 injustice, to use the means thus acquired at their expense, to 
 destroy them and take from them what we granted, as an 
 inducement to make the efforts that have given us those 
 means. And as to the rate of fares, they are still far less 
 than we thought reasonable, and than the amount which we 
 promised that we would not interfere to diminish,—and we 
 cannot do indirectly what we could not directly. And if we 
 have to pay rather more upon this road than we should if it 
 had been constructed in modern times, we are only paying 
 the debt we owe for the skill and knowledge we have obtain¬ 
 ed by their efforts and the risk of their capital. Such would 
 be your answer. And would not every honest heart in the 
 Commonwealth say amen 7 
 
 Now let us apply this argument to the case in hand. The 
 Eastern road was originally established as a long line intend¬ 
 ed to extend from Boston to Portsmouth, and was chartered 
 to the State line, and has since been completed by union with 
 lines in New Hampshire, to the point of original destination. 
 
35 
 
 It was perfectly understood by all parties that the transpor¬ 
 tation between Salem and its vicinity, and Lynn and Boston, 
 must be one of the principal sources, if not the chief one, of 
 profit; and that this would counterbalance the comparatively 
 small receipts from other parts of the road, through towns of 
 sparser population. And the statements of receipts abun¬ 
 dantly prove this:— 
 
 Out of 497,758 passengers, being the whole number in 
 1844,— 302,815 
 
 30,911 
 
 333,726 
 
 were between Beverly and Boston, being more than two 
 thirds of the number of passengers. And out of the receipts 
 for their transportation, the total of which was §188,325 80, 
 those between Beverly and Boston paid §74,887 86 
 17,997 58 
 
 §92,885 44 
 
 being more than one half of the net receipts—and this being 
 only one eighth in length of the road;—while with all this 
 travel the net income has never amounted to six per cent, 
 upon the investment. It follows, therefore, that the diver¬ 
 sion of this travel from this portion of the road will prove 
 entirely destructive of the value of the whole line. Can any 
 injustice more obvious and cruel be perpetrated ? 
 
 The Legislature, for the sake of the establishment of a long 
 line for the public good, grant one going through populous 
 towns and comparatively uninhabited districts, the projectors 
 relying upon the populous towns as the means of maintain¬ 
 ing the whole. The road is built—the public has the benefit 
 —and then the Legislature grants to others the privilege of 
 selecting and cutting out the populous towns, and diverting 
 their custom to other routes; and leave the projectors of the 
 long line to mourn over their lost capital. 
 
 . Is it conceivable, that any men would invest their money, 
 and take the hazards of losing it, in a long line, if it were 
 then known, that the Legislature would grant such new roads 
 for the most populous neighborhoods ? Can any man in his 
 senses say, that the subscribers for this Eastern road, would 
 
36 
 
 have put their names for one cent, if then told, that in a few 
 years, another road would be granted from Salem to Boston 1 
 Certainly not. And if such an intention or willingness to 
 create such a road, would have prevented the establishment 
 of this, if declared or known then, can it justly be carried 
 into effect now 1 If this principle or system be adopted, is it 
 not self-evident that it must be destructive of the long lines, 
 and prevent the creation of any more. Parallel roads, or cross 
 roads, as they will be called, will be established between all 
 considerable towns and villages along the line: each connect¬ 
 ing, at some point, with the main road; thus cutting off its 
 chief sources of custom, and upon the faith of which alone, 
 they were or can be established. Nor ought it to be forgot¬ 
 ten, that subscribers to petitions for such roads, originating 
 with individuals having some lot, or wharf, or estate, that 
 they think may be made subject of great speculation,—may 
 at all times be easily obtained by setting up the cry against 
 monopoly, or the promise of lower fares, and thus cruel injus¬ 
 tice be perpetrated upon the proprietors of established roads, 
 for the real purpose of benefiting private individuals, though 
 ostensibly for the public good. 
 
 Again.—The assistance rendered by the Slate to the Cor¬ 
 poration, as an inducement to go on, and for persons to sub¬ 
 scribe to the stock, imparted a promise, that no unnecessary 
 interference should be authorized with their business. The 
 State, by this aid, gave the sanction of its encouragement, in 
 the strongest manner, to persons to become stockholders; for 
 no expression of an intention to protect them in the enjoy¬ 
 ment of their investment, could be more emphatic than the 
 depositing of this large sum of the public money in their 
 hands, as a pledge of their property as security. And for 
 the State now to grant to a rival and competing corporation, 
 the means of diverting custom from this road, and so to re¬ 
 duce its value, would, probably, render it not of sufficient 
 worth to pay the mortgage. 
 
 The report relating to this loan,—and further aid asked for 
 of the Legislature,—refers to the fact, that the stock was 
 principally held by persons of moderate means , without sur¬ 
 plus wealth, to bestow upon the public, (House Doc. 59,1S45, 
 pp. 5, 6), and advocates the propriety of the assistance as a 
 
37 
 
 means of accommodation and benefit to the stockholders, as 
 well as the public, (p. 11). And can it be, that the State 
 will now come forward, and grant an act, that must terminate 
 in their ruin ? Would not such an act, in private life, look 
 like inveigling parties into an investment, for the benefit of 
 the grantor, and the sacrifice of their interests, as soon as his 
 were attained ? And can it be considered equitable to take 
 the reward from those who have borne all the hazards of the 
 enterprise, and the heat and burden of the day, and bestow 
 it upon strangers ? 
 
 Another most important view, applicable to this and com¬ 
 mon to all the charters granted, presses strongly upon my 
 mind, and I beg leave to present it to the Committee as de¬ 
 serving especial consideration. I refer to the provision in the 
 eighth section of the charter of the remonstrants. In consid¬ 
 ering the question how far the Legislature may be considered 
 as having entered into an implied contract with the Eastern 
 Rail-road, and whether the grant of another substantially 
 parallel road will conflict with such contract, this section of 
 the charter deserves particular notice. It provides that the 
 Legislature shall have power to regulate tolls and profits, but 
 that they shall not, without the consent of the corporation, 
 be so reduced as to produce less than 10 per cent, per annum. 
 
 Now it will hardly be asserted by the most strenuous op- 
 poser of vested rights, that the Legislature may do indirectly 
 what it cannot do directly. If it has expressly agreed that 
 the enjoyment of profits to the amount of 10 per cent, shall 
 be considered a reasonable compensation for the hazards of 
 the investment, and expressly stipulates that the State will 
 never reduce it below that amount; can the Legislature au¬ 
 thorize the construction of another road, to be used for the 
 same purposes, while this accomplishes all for which it was 
 granted, and thus reduce the tolls below that amount? Is 
 there any substantial difference in principle or effect between 
 an act directly reducing the rate of tolls below 10 per cent, 
 for the benefit of the public, or establishing another road by 
 the side of it, to enable the public to travel over it at a cor¬ 
 respondingly cheaper rate ? Is not this keeping the promise 
 to the ear and breaking it to the hope ? And will the Com¬ 
 monwealth of Massachusetts take her stand by the side of 
 
38 
 
 the Turkish emperor, who, having promised that he would 
 spare the head of an enemy if he would surrender, severed his 
 body asunder? or the pope, who offered to give up the head 
 of a family whom he held captive, if his followers would sur¬ 
 render a fortress, slew,—before he gave him up? or take 
 her stand by the side of a quibbling attorney, who sacrifices 
 the spirit to the letter of the law: and say she does not reduce 
 the tolls, but only authorizes others to reduce them ? It can¬ 
 not be! This clause most plainly and unequivocally shows 
 that, when this contract was made, both parties anticipated 
 that it would yield a fair compensation, and that any thing 
 short of 10 per cent, should be so considered. It was upon 
 the faith of that expectation that the remonstrants invested 
 their money, and it involved the most solemn obligation on 
 the part of the State to do nothing to impair it. 
 
 Do you, sir, suppose that this investment would have been 
 made, or this road have been built, if to this eighth section 
 had been added a clause reserving the right of the State to 
 reduce the fare, by authorizing the building of another road 
 by the side of it? Every mams mind and heart answers 
 that it would not have been. And shall the Legislature now 
 indirectly interpolate the clause ? 
 
 The charter petitioned for, if granted, and if the objects of 
 the petitioners be realized, will greatly injure, if not ruin, the 
 road of the remonstrants. And this, if done, will be done by 
 the act of the same Legislature that held out, as an induce¬ 
 ment to these remonstrants to invest their money in it, that, 
 if they would do so, the grantors would never interfere to 
 reduce its annual profits below 10 per cent. But I forbear 
 further to press this argument. I leave it to the consciences 
 of the Committee and the Legislature, and should be willing 
 to leave it to the honest and sober-minded of the petitioners 
 themselves, if time and opportunity were given for examina¬ 
 tion and reflection. 
 
 And the same reasoning applies with equal force, whether 
 the proposed road be from Salem through Danvers and 
 Lynn, or from Danvers through Lynn. For, in either case, it 
 is a competing road for the custom relied upon in the estab¬ 
 lishment of the present road. The testimony, and written 
 estimates, and the statements of counsel—all embrace a large 
 
39 
 
 amount of income from Salem itself—which Of course in the 
 original calculations, belonged exclusively to the existing 
 road. They embrace all the custom of the adjoining town 
 of Danvers, which is little more than a continuation of Sa¬ 
 lem, being indeed once a part of it, and was as properly and 
 reasonably counted upon in the establishment of the existing 
 road as that of Salem itself. And also embrace a very large 
 portion if not the chief of the custom of Lynn, which was of 
 course relied upon as exclusively pertaining to the old road. 
 
 And here we cannot but notice the grasping spirit of the 
 petitioners, who, not content with taking the travel and 
 transportation from Danvers and its adjoining towns, and for 
 which they say that the new road is wanted, go out of their 
 way to enter Lynn, through which the present road passes, 
 for the purpose of withdrawing its custom there. The proof 
 is that the proposed road admits of a shorter and more direct 
 route westerly of Lynn, and that its divergence to that place 
 is merely to withdraw the custom now passing upon the old 
 road. 
 
 If, however, contrary to our convictions of the total want 
 of proof of any necessity of another road, and of the entire 
 sufficiency of a branch from the present road to Danvers, for 
 all reasonable purposes, the Committee shall see fit to report 
 a bill from Danvers to Boston, we claim that it shall be upon 
 condition that it shall not be connected with any rail-road 
 leading to Salem. The only one with which it can be so 
 connected at present, is the Georgetown and Danvers road; 
 and, as before stated, such connection is doubtless contem¬ 
 plated. But such a union would be obviously most unjust 
 to these remonstrants. The Georgetown and Danvers road 
 was authorized as a branch of the present road to bring to it 
 the custom of Danvers and Georgetown, and the intermediate 
 towns between them, not for'the purpose of withdrawing 
 travel from it to another road. Such was the intention of 
 the Legislature, and the understanding of all the parties. 
 ,And to permit it now to be used for the purpose of diverting 
 the business and destroying the most profitable portion of 
 the existing road, would be an obvious perversion of its 
 original object. Nor ought the power to be given to the pe- 
 
40 
 
 titioners to effe*ct such a perversion as they will possess, if a 
 charter be granted without this restriction. 
 
 Nor is this all. The Georgetown and Danvers Rail-road 
 Corporation, now has the absolute right to enter upon, the 
 Eastern road at Salem: and the proposed road, if created, is 
 to be a branch of the rail-road of the Boston and Maine Com¬ 
 pany. The petitioners, therefore, by uniting with those two 
 companies, as it certainly might, and probably would do, or 
 by disposing of its interest to the Boston and Maine R. R. Co., 
 would acquire the power not only of withdrawing the whole 
 custom of Salem and its vicinity from the road of the remon¬ 
 strants, but also of using it for the transportation of freight 
 and passengers in their cars, to and from the line of the State. 
 In other words, any beneficial use of the present Eastern 
 road, would be annihilated at the pleasure of the Boston and 
 Maine Rail-road Company. 
 
 Further,—if the accommodation of the people of Danvers 
 require a road direct to Boston, and the Committee are dis¬ 
 posed to grant a charter; let it be given direct from Dan¬ 
 vers, through Saugus to Boston. Why should it be connected 
 with Salem or Lynn 1 Why, for the purpose of communica¬ 
 tion between Danvers and Boston,—should they be permitted 
 to go back wards to another place,—to divert the travel be¬ 
 longing to another road : or pass through a town out of their 
 way, through which another rail-road already passes, merely 
 to withdraw the custom from that'? Will the sound-hearted 
 portion of that community hold this to be fair 1 
 
 Nor can it be reasonably said, that they want a rail-road 
 communication with Salem, too. Do they want it, so that 
 they could build one for that object only, if they had one 
 direct to Boston'? Or does any town, so near to another as 
 Danvers to Salem, ever need, or can it ever support a rail¬ 
 road merely for the transportation between the two places 1 
 All experience cries out against it. The idea that any freight 
 would be transported in that manner between places so con¬ 
 tiguous, is absurd, in the nature of things, and disproved by 
 the history of every rail-road in the country. And so of the 
 transportation of passengers. But if it were true, that Dan¬ 
 vers needed a rail-road to Boston, and also one to Salem for 
 its own purposes, it would not follow that they should be 
 
41 
 
 united, so as to take the travel between Salem and Boston. 
 If they would, and can maintain two such roads, and the 
 Legislature see fit to grant them, let it be under such restric¬ 
 tions as shall prevent any misuse of the other purposes, to 
 the injury of the existing road. Do not let them, under pre¬ 
 tence of receiving a rail-road for the accommodation of trans¬ 
 portation between Danvers,—and Salem and Danvers and 
 Boston,—have one to take that between Salem and Boston. 
 Such a proceeding would be a palpable injury to the Eastern 
 road, and moral injustice to its proprietors. And whatever 
 may be the feelings and opinions of the honest men of Dan¬ 
 vers now,—I have no belief that, in their sober second 
 thoughts, they would desire it. 
 
 But let me not be misunderstood by these remarks, as con¬ 
 ceding that a charter of a new road from Danvers, with any 
 restrictions or conditions, that can be inserted, could in effect 
 be any thing other than one for another road from Salem to 
 Boston. It is obvious that this is impracticable. The towns 
 of Danvers and Salem, although two in name, are one in 
 substance, so far as rail-road accommodation is concerned : 
 a thickly inhabited street being the dividing line with the 
 citizens of Danvers on one side, and those of Salem on the 
 other. They are as much one town for this purpose, as the 
 different parts of Boston are one city : and as much united by 
 public and private vehicles and intercommunication. The 
 depot of the proposed road would be about as near to the 
 depot of the existing road, as that of the Lowell road, in Bos¬ 
 ton, is to that of the Worcester depot, if not nearer: or as 
 that of the Worcester to that of the Eastern road. And we 
 object, therefore, to the road prayed for, however apparently 
 disconnected with Salem, just as we should to one for another 
 
 road direct from Salem to some other terminus in Boston,_ 
 
 or from Boston to some other terminus in Salem. As much 
 reason now exists for either to accommodate certain portions 
 of those two cities, as exists for a new road to accommodate 
 the people of Danvers, while she is so near the present depot, 
 or can be so conveniently accommodated by a spur from it. 
 
 But much stress is laid out of doors, in conversation and in 
 newspapers, about the rights and benefits of competition, and 
 free liberty to all to construct rail-roads where they please; 
 
42 
 
 and it is asked why it is not as just to grant a parallel and 
 competing rail-road, as it was to grant this Eastern Rail-road 
 to destroy or impair the Salem turnpike 1 And the same 
 argument was vehemently urged against the Lowell road, as 
 having injured the Middlesex Canal. 
 
 The answer, however, seems very plain. There can be no 
 pretence of improper interference or competition where an 
 entirely new and’ different mode of transportation is intro¬ 
 duced, as is a rail-road compared to a turnpike or canal. 
 Turnpikes can never be said to interfere with canals or rail¬ 
 roads,—nor either with them , contrary to the anticipations of 
 the parties constructing them; because neither is undertaken 
 with the view or idea of preventing the establishment of any 
 new modes of transportation that may be invented—but 
 merely that they shall not be needlessly interfered with by 
 the like modes affording no better accommodation. But if, in 
 the present case, any equitable ground of objection or com¬ 
 plaint existed on the part of the Salem Turnpike Corpora¬ 
 tion, it was fairly provided for by a clause in the charter, 
 giving them the power to take one quarter part of the stock, 
 whereby they were virtually enabled to convert their road 
 into the rail-road if they had seen fit so to do. 
 
 The remonstrants do not wish to stand in the way of other 
 improvements, nor deny the power of the Legislature to 
 license or construct them; and will yield to any that shall 
 arise, whether by vessels navigating the air or some yet to be 
 discovered means of travelling upon lightning. But for the 
 Legislature to establish parallel roads between the same ter¬ 
 mini, of the same nature, canal by canal, turnpike by turn¬ 
 pike, rail-road by rail-road, where no public necessity calls 
 for greater accommodation of that description—but where the 
 existing one is confessedly competent for all the needs of the 
 people; and where the tolls are within the bounds prescribed 
 by the Legislature as just and reasonable; merely for the 
 purpose of enabling the parties to speculate upon each other, 
 and the public to derive a supposed benefit from the competi¬ 
 tion is, we respectfully submit, contrary to all principles of 
 sound policy and enlightened justice—and, with great defer¬ 
 ence we say, is directly in violation of the Constitution of the 
 State. 
 
43 
 
 That Constitution vests the power of granting these char¬ 
 ters only when a public exigency demands it. The Legisla¬ 
 ture does not possess the power except it be created by such 
 exigency. And can an exigency be said to exist where the 
 public is already fully accommodated, and at a rate of tolls 
 far below that which the Legislature itself has expressly de¬ 
 termined and declared that the public ought to pay ? 
 
 What constitutes a public exigency for a rail-road any 
 where ? It must be to furnish either more immediate, or safe, 
 or speedy, or cheap transportation, than at present exist be¬ 
 tween the proposed termini. If a proposed road will not 
 make the communication so much more direct, safe, rapid or 
 cheap than that existing, as to constitute an equivalent for 
 the expense of its construction, no such exigency exists, and 
 therefore the power to grant the charter does not exist. 
 
 Now in the case before the Committee, it is proved beyond 
 question that the proposed road from Danvers will not afford 
 so frequent communication with Lynn and Boston, by nearly 
 one half, as that which the present road, with a spur to Dan¬ 
 vers, will afford; and will not, therefore, constitute so imme¬ 
 diate a connection. That it cannot be nearly so safe, be¬ 
 cause it will be of a single track only—whereas the existing 
 road has two for two thirds of the way, and will shortly 
 have them throughout. That it probably will not afford so 
 rapid and punctual transportation: and certainly none more 
 so than the present one supplies. That no cheaper rate of 
 tolls is ventured to be promised. And that the present road, 
 with a spur, can receive and accommodate ten times the trans¬ 
 portation which the proposed road is computed to receive. 
 
 Where, then, is the exigency ? If it be said, as it often is, 
 that the competition will produce cheaper rates of fare on 
 both roads, then I ask whether the Legislature have not, by 
 the eighth section of the charter to these remonstrants, deci¬ 
 ded that, until the tolls exceed ten per cent, annually, no pub¬ 
 lic exigency can exist for reducing them? And whether they 
 .have, as yet, amounted to much more than half that rate? 
 And when the government has granted to individuals a char¬ 
 ter avowedly for the purpose of procuring this public accom¬ 
 modation,—and induced them to invest over $2,000,000 in a 
 road for that end,—and the road answers all the purposes for 
 
44 
 
 which the charter was granted,—and yields a less profit than 
 was stipulated in the charter to be a reasonable return for 
 the interest and risk of the investment,—can the same gov¬ 
 ernment interfere to grant another charter, for no other end 
 but to reduce the value of the property so invested, by dimin¬ 
 ishing the income from it? This is the real question upon 
 the facts before the Committee. 
 
 We respectfully submit that when the charter of the exist¬ 
 ing road was granted, and the road went into operation, the 
 exigency which authorized a charter for a rail-road from 
 Salem and Danvers to Boston ceased: and no power could 
 be revested in the Legislature to grant another until a new 
 exigency should arise; and until it does arise the existing 
 charter of necessity confers an exclusive right —both because 
 the Legislature can grant no other, and because the parties 
 who' invested their money under it did so in the faith that 
 no other could be granted. 
 
 And this is the true foundation of vested rights , which it 
 has of late become so fashionable to scofi’ at. I will not 
 condescend to declaim upon this subject before this Commit¬ 
 tee, but I should like to propose a few plain questions to 
 those who seem to think so lightly of them. 1. Can the 
 Legislature take private property for a rail-road when no 
 public exigency requires one ? 2. If the public exigency did 
 require one, and it has been already constructed, and affords 
 all the accommodation anticipated: and at less rates of fare 
 than that determined upon by the Legislature as reasonable : 
 and can accommodate a much greater public need than now 
 exists for that mode of transportation, does a public exigency 
 exist for another ? 3. If the State, instead of exercising its 
 power to build such a road at the public expense, has trans¬ 
 ferred it to private individuals, in considers tion of their un¬ 
 dertaking to invest their private fortunes in constructing the. 
 road, with the right to receive all the income accruing from 
 its use, until it amount to a given per cents ge; and they 
 have proceeded to do so: and the road answers all the pur¬ 
 poses intended, and does not produce the per centage stipu¬ 
 lated ; have not those individuals acquired all the exclusive 
 right which the State possessed, of constructing such a road ? 
 4. Gan the State, under these circumstances, establish a hew 
 
45 
 
 road between the same termini, or substantially between 
 them,—no new exigency having arisen? 5. If the State 
 cannot do so, can it delegate the power to others to do so ? 
 6. And does it not follow, that until the occurrence of such 
 new exigency, the proprietors under the existing charter, 
 have a vested right to the exclusive use of this mode of trans¬ 
 portation between those termini, so far as the State has pow¬ 
 er to create it ? 
 
 It is often said that no charter can vest in a corporation 
 any right to the person of the traveller, or to the transporta¬ 
 tion of his property; that he is free to come and go, and car¬ 
 ry his goods-whenever and wherever he pleases. This is a 
 mere man of straw set up to be knocked down ; mere decla¬ 
 mation for popular effect upon the unthinking. No one pre¬ 
 tends to any such right. Persons may, doubtless, travel as 
 they please, and carry their property as they please, and on 
 private rail-roads if they choose; but if they elect to use the 
 public roads, they must use those lawfully established by pub¬ 
 lic authority, and upon the terms prescribed by the govern¬ 
 ment which created them. And if the government can create 
 but one , they must use that one and no other. And there is 
 no hardship in this; they are not obliged to use it, they do 
 so voluntarily or not at all. And if they do so, they pay no 
 more than a fair equivalent. It. is just like spinning cotton 
 or wool; every one has a right to spin his own if he please, 
 but if he chooses to do it in a particular manner, which be¬ 
 longs exclusively to an individual under a grant from the 
 government by letters patent, he must do it upon the terms 
 prescribed by him. He cannot set up machinery of the same 
 kind merely because it is for his interest or pleasure to do so. 
 
 We have thus far considered the question upon the hypoth¬ 
 esis that a road from Danvers, through Lynn to Boston, 
 would be able to maintain itself, and endeavoured to satisfy 
 the Committee, that, if such were the fact, still that no pub¬ 
 lic exigency exists to authorize its establishment, while pub- 
 lie policy and justice to the remonstrants alike forbid it. But 
 so far from there being any proof that such a road could re¬ 
 turn a fair income for the investment, the evidence is concht- 
 sive that the enterprise, if undertaken, must result in great 
 pecuniary loss. And of course, if this be so, no such exi- 
 
46 
 
 gency exists as will warrant its establishment—for no rail¬ 
 road can be said to be demanded by the public exigency 
 which cannot pay interest upon the cost of construction. 
 
 The first and a very remarkable feature in the project to 
 be noticed, is, that the petitioners make no pretence that their 
 proposed road could be maintained without withdrawing its 
 principal, if not almost entire nourishment, from the existing 
 road; there is no suggestion that it could stand for a moment 
 if depending exclusively on new custom, no part of which 
 now pertains to that in operation. The mere increase of 
 travel and transportation from Danvers and Lynn, indepen¬ 
 dently of what now passes on the Eastern road, it is idle to 
 pretend would authorize the establishment of such new road, 
 even if the increase suggested were proved. The calcula¬ 
 tions are based upon an entire withdrawal, from the Eastern 
 road,' of all the present travel and transportation of Danvers, 
 and nearly all that of Lynn, and a large portion of that of 
 Salem. The project, therefore, has on its front the recom¬ 
 mendation of an attempt to take away from another company, 
 which has invested a vast amount of property in an existing 
 road under the sanction of the Legislature, and conducted it 
 iu the most faithful and exemplary manner, and never yet 
 realized but a trifle more than half of the income which the 
 Legislature held out as an inducement, a very large portion 
 and by far the most valuable portion of its custom. It is be¬ 
 lieved that no application was ever before made less entitled 
 to favor, or less consistent with the principles of just regard 
 for the rights and interests of others, since rail-roads came 
 into existence. 
 
 Another circumstance worthy of note, is the entire loose¬ 
 ness and uncertainty of all the testimony on the part of pe¬ 
 titioners on the subjects of freight and passengers, and the 
 expenses of conducting their road, and the elements of com¬ 
 putation on which their estimates are founded. They have 
 presented no statistical accounts taken from authentic sources 
 save one, and that contradicts their last two estimates en¬ 
 tirely ; and no persons employed in the transportation of pas¬ 
 sengers or freight in any manner, or in the management of 
 rail-roads, have been called to testify to facts or probabilities; 
 but mere loose conjectures of men wholly unskilled in statis- 
 
47 
 
 tics and written estimates made by counsel, and changed 
 three times during the hearing, and unsupported by any thing 
 like proof, are all the materials placed before the Committee 
 upon which this claim for the establishment of a new road 
 is founded. Let us then examine these estimates and com¬ 
 pare them with the proofs, to see how far they are sustained 
 by evidence; and then compute the anticipated income at 
 those estimates with the certain cost of the road, and expen¬ 
 ses of running, and see the result. 
 
 The estimate of the cost of the road by Mr. Hayward’s 
 statement, from South Danvers to the junction, with furni- 
 
 ture, &c. .... 
 
 . $220,000 
 
 Add spur to North Danvers, 3£ miles, . 70,000 
 
 $290,000 
 
 Interest at 6 per cent, . 
 
 . $17,400 
 
 The first estimate of receipts and 
 counsel, marked A, is from Salem,— 
 
 expenditures, given by 
 
 Exhibits 30,000 passengers from 
 
 South Danvers. 
 
 3,000 
 
 North Danvers. 
 
 " 30,000 
 
 Lynn. 
 
 “ 6,000 
 
 Saugus. 
 
 30,000 
 
 Salem. 
 
 “ 10,000 
 
 adjoining towns. 
 
 Total, 109,000 annually. 
 
 Now, where is the proof that any such number of passen¬ 
 gers will travel over the road. Mr. Daniels, page 17, esti¬ 
 mates the number for Danvers at over fifty per day each way, 
 and this includes those to North Danvers by way of South 
 Danvers, 30,000; no statement, but a mere opinion, and so 
 expressed. Mr. Allen, page 24, says he has not thought of 
 the subject,—but calculates about one hundred daily,—it be¬ 
 ing his mere conjecture; and this is all the proof of the $30,000 
 from South Danvers: the weakest testimony ever offered in 
 a court of justice, in a $20 suit. Out of their fifteen ol 
 
twenty witnesses, only one was found to give even an opinion, 
 that he has any confidence in, and the other mere conjecture, 
 with a careful reservation that it shall pass for nothing more. 
 
 It is not shewn what portion of this 30,000, if any, are 
 not already accommodated by the existing road; and it is 
 very difficult to believe, that the number from that town 
 would be much greater, if the road went through it, than it 
 ■is now; a large portion of the population being already about 
 as near the depot at Salem, as many of its inhabitants, and 
 nearer than the inhabitants of the north end of Boston, are to 
 the Worcester depot, or those at the south end to the Lowell 
 or the Eastern depots. 
 
 If there had been any disposition to look carefully into this 
 matter, some approach to calculation might easily have been 
 made; by statistics from the omnibus drivers, and among the 
 inhabitants; but they probably would not have answered so 
 good a purpose, as general opinion and conjecture. It is, 
 however, worth while to contrast this estimate with those 
 presented by the town of Danvers, or those who represented 
 its statistics in 1836, when the charter of the existing road 
 was granted. (Senate Doc., No. 77, 1836, p. 3.) Danvers 
 had a population of 5000, this included the whole town, (S. 
 & N.); number of passengers in stage coaches, 2.500, not 
 including those who travelled in private carriages. Now, it 
 is not proved, that Danvers has doubled within the period of 
 nine years, nor is that at all probable. But, suppose it to be 
 true, that would give 5000 travellers by public conveyances; 
 and if we quadrupled that, we should still fall far below the 
 present estimate of 30,000. Indeed, the absurdity of suppos¬ 
 ing, that a town of 7000 or 8000 inhabitants, nien, women, 
 and children, could give 30,000 passengers yearly, is too ap¬ 
 parent for argument. The great mass never travel in that 
 way at all, and very few, comparatively, do so often. 
 
 Next comes North Danvers-—set down at 3,000. The 
 only witness to North Danvers is Mr. Elias Putnam, who 
 gives the number 9,340. Where these are to come from,— 
 that small village containing much fewer inhabitants than 
 South Danvers, is not shown, and surpasses imagination to 
 conjecture. This population, I suppose, was included with 
 
49 
 
 that of South Danvers in the estimate of 1836, and the whole 
 together made but 5,000; and yet now they are to furnish 
 over 39,000 rail-road passengers annually. 
 
 Next comes Lynn—set down at 30,000. All the testimony 
 here is from Mr. Andrews Breed, whose hotel is to he re-es¬ 
 tablished by the new road; and whose wish, in his estimate, 
 seems father to the thought. He begins by saying that he 
 thinks from one quarter to one half of the Lynn passengers 
 would go by the new route—thus leaving a pretty broad mar¬ 
 gin for estimates; and finally says that he learned that the 
 receipts at the hotel depot, on the present road, were $6,000 
 last year, and he thinks that one fourth of it would go by 
 the new road. If we grant all this, it gives only 15,000 pas¬ 
 sengers, being half the number in the estimate. But in look¬ 
 ing at the map of Lynn, it will he perceived that the present 
 road is far more convenient to the inhabitants of Lynn, and 
 would take all the summer travel from Nahant and the sea¬ 
 shore, the main depot being close at handwhile the proof 
 from the teamster is, that three fourths of the merchandise 
 he takes to Boston are shipped on Commercial street and the 
 adjoining wharves; so that the inhabitants of Lynn, who 
 are most to be depended upon as frequent travellers, would 
 also take the old route. The calculation of 5,000 from Lynn 
 would probably far exceed the reality. 
 
 The next is Saugus—set down at 6,000. The witnesses 
 to this point are Mr. Newhall, and one other person who sta¬ 
 ted that he agreed in his statements. Mr. Newhall’s testi¬ 
 mony is, that he consulted the thirty men who constitute, we 
 suppose, the bone and muscle of Saugus, and found that they 
 averaged ninety-three times a week—equal to 4,736 annu¬ 
 ally—most of which, at present, travel, as I infer from bis 
 statements, in single horse wagons; and certainly would con¬ 
 tinue to do so, if a dozen rail-roads went through their town, 
 as all experience proves. 
 
 For this estimate, therefore, out of the promised 109,000, 
 we have, one opinion and one conjecture for 30,000 
 
 One opinion for . . 3,000 
 
 One opinion for, say . 15,000 
 
 Two opinions 4.376 
 
 7 52,376 
 
50 
 
 the remainder being ■wholly unproved—there being no testi¬ 
 mony, that I perceive, for the 30,000 from Salem, the 10,000 
 from adjoining towns, the other 15,000 from Lynn, and 1,700 
 from Saugus. The proof, therefore, if it can by any imagi¬ 
 nation be called such, falls short more than one half of the 
 first estimate. And if suitable deductions be made for the 
 exaggeration which is natural on such occasions, and without 
 the slightest impeachment of integrity, we may safely take off 
 half of that thus supported, and reduce the reality to one 
 fourth of the estimate. What can be more absurd than that 
 Saugus, with 1,200 inhabitants, should furnish 4,000 passen¬ 
 gers annually 1 
 
 The case had gone on with this estimate as the basis of 
 calculation, until nearly all the evidence of the remonstrants 
 was in, when, on the afternoon of the 4th instant, we were 
 greeted with a new one,—marked B,*—the counsel seeming 
 to have endless fertility of genius, in this department at least. 
 And if he could make passengers as readily as he can esti¬ 
 mates, he would soon cover the' land with rail-roads not an 
 inch apart, and find more passengers than they could carry. 
 This new, or second estimate, marked B, gives entire new 
 color to the matter, and shews how modest the original one 
 was, in reference to the magnitude of his native town; or 
 else how impossible it is to keep pace with the rapidity of its 
 increase in population. When the case was opened, South 
 Danvers was to give 30,000 passengers, and North Danvers 
 3,000—total 33,000. But now in a few days Danvers and 
 towns adjoining mount up to 60,000. A very rapid growth 
 certainly, and quite exceeding even the advance from 2,500 
 to 30,000 in nine years. Nor must we understand that the 
 towns, other towns adjoining, include any not embraced in 
 the former statement, for in this last estimate he has about 
 14,000 passengers from Salem and elsewhere. 
 
 Now it is natural to ask how this change in the estimates 
 came about 1 —there being none in the facts proved:—and it 
 not having been shewn that Danvers was so preeminent in 
 replenishing the earth, one might be at a loss to account for 
 this sudden and vast addition to its population. 
 
 See Appendix. 
 
51 
 
 But the reason is very obvious. In the first statement were 
 set down 30,000 passengers from Salem, and 10,000 from ad¬ 
 joining towns. But the counsel had withdrawn Salem from 
 the line, and therefore he must give up the 30,000 passen¬ 
 gers expressly named as from that city, though he could re¬ 
 tain that portion of Salem passengers, included under the 
 convenient phrase, adjoining towns. But although he had 
 to give up the passengers, he couldn’t afford to give up the 
 fares ; so he takes 27,000 that he formerly gave to Salem, 
 and claps them on to Danvers; and apprehending that a little 
 additional increase would be convenient; and thinking that 
 Danvers had done her share in bringing forth 27,000 travel¬ 
 lers in a few days, he divides the burthen by putting 4,000 
 more on to little Saugus, who thus nearly doubles her child¬ 
 ren while we are debating the matter. And not content with 
 that, the counsel considering it not just to give all the credit 
 of this wonderful fecundity to those named, puts about 
 4,000 more to the account of the adjoining towns. What a 
 wonderful people this town of Danvers with its vicinity ex¬ 
 hibits ! Why, sir, at this rate, she will not only need another 
 rail-road, but one to another planet to carry off the surplus 
 population. 
 
 We certainly had hoped that our statistical miseries were 
 at an end with this new development, but just at the close 
 of the case, in comes another, the only difference, however, 
 in point of numbers, being that the gentleman takes off the 
 4,000 he had before given to the adjoining towns, though, as 
 we shall presently see, he has a convenient way of his own 
 of making up the loss, by adding in fares, what he deducts 
 in passengers. 
 
 Nothing can be more fatal to any rational belief in these 
 statements, than their utter inconsistency. We declare them 
 one, and all; to be entirely unsupported by any proof, and in 
 conflict with, and destructive of each other. So much for the 
 numbers of passengers. 
 
 The computation of fares is equally erroneous. In the 
 two first estimates the rates of fare are at 30 cts. from Salem, 
 and 25 cts. from Lynn; being predicated upon the rate of 40 
 cts. through from Salem, and 30 cts. through from Lynn; 
 these being the prices that the present road has established 
 
to commence on the first of April, and as low as even the 
 petitioners could venture to suggest; and the calculation be¬ 
 ing that the Boston and Maine Rail-road Company will 
 charge only 10 cts. each. But the evidence is clear and un¬ 
 disputed that the Boston and Maine Rail-road Company will 
 not charge less than 12J, and may charge 15 cts. And 
 when it is remembered that the proposed road is to enter 
 upon that of the Boston and Maine Company, four miles from 
 Boston, and to use the most expensive and valuable portion 
 of it,—and their depots purchased at immense cost,—it is ap¬ 
 parent that 15 cents will he a very reasonable charge. There 
 would therefore be a deduction of fare, 2\ to 5 cents at the 
 least, to be made for every passenger included in these com¬ 
 putations. 
 
 The last estimate, however, varies from both the others, 
 and is predicated upon allowing the Boston and Maine Rail¬ 
 road Company, 8 cents only for each passenger; upon what 
 pretence it is impossible to imagine, unless the gentleman 
 thinks that his estimates are not only to control evidence 
 instead of constituting its results,—but are to control the pro¬ 
 ceedings of the Boston and Maine Rail-road Company, in 
 reference to their rates of fare. 
 
 So as to the statistics concerning freight—they are equally 
 unsustained by any satisfactory evidence, inconsistent with 
 each other, and refuted by all known experience. The first 
 estimate set down 
 
 South Danvers, 
 
 - 10,000 tons. 
 
 North Danvers, - 
 
 - 3,000 
 
 Lynn, 
 
 - 10,000 • 
 
 Saugus, 
 
 - 2,000 
 
 Salem, 
 
 - 5,000 
 
 
 30,000 
 
 The evidence on the subject is singularly loose and unsatis¬ 
 factory ;—no testimony from the persons employed in trans¬ 
 portation adduced by petitioners—no effort to obtain satisfac¬ 
 tory information except by Mr. Allen. All the rest mere 
 general statement, entitled to very little weight, however 
 honestly given. Mr. Daniels estimates the amount carried 
 now by wagons at 14,000 or 15,000 tons. Whether he in- 
 
53 
 
 eluded the onions, hay and apples, which he mentioned, 
 does not appear. Mr. Upton, who expects his land to he 
 taken for the depot, seems to estimate it at even more, by 
 computing the number of teams and what they ought to have. 
 The only estimate approaching to certainty or any degree of 
 rational confidence, and I am happy to say that there is one 
 to be trusted, is that made by Mr. Allen, who seems to have 
 gone to every individual in the village who ever had any 
 thing carried between Boston and S. Danvers. His written 
 schedule is in the case marked D, and seems to embrace the 
 whole,—from the provision dealer, who has 4 tons pass the 
 road per year, to the Danvers Iron works, who have 1700 
 annually; and includes every thing, not only hides, shoes 
 and merchandise of all sorts, but onions, apples and squashes; 
 being the whole business of 98 persons and firms, and 
 1792 tons for several d vi h al which I suppose includes 
 all the rest of the inhabitants, who ever have any thing 
 transported to or from this city. So that we may safely con¬ 
 sider this the extreme of the tonnage of Danvers, including 
 the great baggage wagon and the little one horse Dearborn; 
 and if we take the whole, is probably to come over the pro¬ 
 posed road, it does not quite sustain this first estimate, 
 though it does nearly so. 
 
 As to North Danvers, set down at 3000 tons, Mr. Elias 
 Putnam estimates 4000 tons for North Danvers, George¬ 
 town and Topsfield, including the iron factory at Npw Mills, 
 as I understood him. Now Georgetown is only . 6 miles 
 from Haverhill, through which the Boston and Maine rail¬ 
 road now passes, and is 12 miles from the terminus of the 
 proposed road; and no reason has been found or stated why 
 the inhabitants of Georgetown should elect to carry their 
 goods 12 miles to get to a rail-road, when they can get to the 
 same one substantially 6 miles hearer; and the witness ad¬ 
 mitted that the people of North Danvers do not now gener¬ 
 ally send their shoes by. the rail-road, excepting in bad trav¬ 
 elling. 
 
 As to Saugus, Mr. Newhall makes the whole about-, 
 
 tons per year. He expresses no opinion, however, of the 
 quantity that would come by rail-road, and admits ignorance 
 whether other towns, similarly situated, ever use rail-roads 
 for transporting freight. 
 
54 
 
 Lynn set down at 10,000 tons;—no estimate by any wit¬ 
 ness ;—mere general statement of Mr. Breed, that merchan¬ 
 dise would go by the new road;—no proof or reason given. 
 The only witness who gives an opinion is Mr. Treadwell, 
 (p. 40) who thinks it might be 4000 tons, less than half the 
 estimate. 
 
 Salem set down at 5000 tons—Salem and Danvers at 5000. 
 No proof of either. 
 
 Now, the whole weight of testimony is opposed to the be¬ 
 lief, that any considerable portion of this freight would go 
 over tlib road. As to South Danvers, the whole amount, as 
 estimated by Mr. Allen, is short of $10,000; and it is obvious, 
 that very large portions of that, if not nearly the whole, would 
 be carried by wagons, as it now is; it is much more conveni¬ 
 ent, and in good travelling certainly as cheap. The loading 
 and unloading at each end, constitute the chief trouble and 
 expense; while the convenience of taking up the different 
 parcels from their respective consignors, at one end, and the 
 delivery of them to their several consignees, at the other ; 
 more than counterbalances any degree of cheapness in the 
 mere transportation by rail-road between depot and depot. 
 
 No instance is shewn, where the general business of any 
 town, within that distance, is done on rail-roads. Between 
 Salem and Boston only about 6,000 tons annually are carried 
 upon the rail-road, including all that comes from Danvers and 
 North Danvers, and the adjoining towns. How preposterous, 
 then, to think that South Danvers alone can send 10,000. 
 Mr. Lee testifies, that there is on the Providence road no 
 transient freight from Canton to speak of, but only that of two 
 large manufactories; and Canton is about the same distance 
 from Boston as Danvers. Mr. Storrow represents the amount 
 of freight on the Lowell road, from places short of Lowell, 
 very small; that he expects to get about 500 from Woburn, 
 where shoe and tanning business is carried on extensively, 
 and to which place a branch has been constructed; and that 
 is all they anticipate. 
 
 . As to freight from Lynn and Saugus, 12,000 tons, it must be 
 stricken out altogether. The proof is clear, from testimony of 
 teamsters, and actual experiment of the present road, that no 
 rail-road can compete with teams by carrying at 50 cents per 
 
ton. The experiment has been fully tried, and utterly 
 failed. 
 
 It is proved, that three different contracts have been made 
 for carrying freight on this road. One for j§l per ton, one 
 for 75 cents, and one for 60 cents, with privilege of free 
 passage for persons to attend and deliver it; but that the 
 wagons could carry it more cheaply than at those rates. And 
 one of the principal teamsters has testified, that the road can¬ 
 not compete with the wagons at more than 37 cents per ton; 
 while it was also shewn, that the corporation had offered to 
 furnish a six ton car daily to and from Boston, for $X^>00 a 
 year, which was refused. And no conceivable advantage 
 can he stated which the new road would have over the pre¬ 
 sent one. The only one Mr. Breed could suggest, was, that 
 freight would be less handled. But he plainly shewed his 
 ignorance, as it is not more frequently handled at this depot 
 than at any other. 
 
 And the experience of this road is in exact accordance with 
 that of the Boston and Providence road to Dedham, being 
 two miles farther. There it is proved that the road cannot 
 compete with wagons, and an arrangement is now made with 
 the teamsters to carry freight at a price, that yields no profit 
 to the road. They receive only 25 cents per ton, and only 
 get 4,000 tons at that rate, = $1,000 per year. So, by the 
 experience of the Lowell road, which receives nothing worth 
 naming from freight within fifteen miles of Boston. 
 
 It is proved, that the freight is now'- carried and delivered, 
 with as much punctuality on this as upon any road in the 
 State,—and as cheaply. That there is precisely the same 
 amount of handling, or loading and unloading, as at every 
 other depot and no more; that the only difference between 
 this and any other depot, is, the crossing the ferry with the 
 goods upon the trucks: but this expense is borne by the com¬ 
 pany, and does not fall upon the owner or consignee. So 
 that no reason exists why merchandise should not he trans¬ 
 ported over this road as well as over any other. The truth 
 is, that no rail-road can ever compete with wagons, within 
 fifteen miles of a city, in ordinarily good travelling,—and it 
 is proved, that, although the transportation by this road is 
 very cheap,—baggage wagons still run from Salem,—and 
 
56 
 
 they doubtless would still run from Danvers, and carry nearly 
 all their goods, were the new road made. 
 
 Taking, therefore, the evidence in the case, and it is mani¬ 
 fest that the estimate is not to be in any essential degree re¬ 
 lied upon. That the estimate from South Danvers of 10,000 
 tons is altogether too high; and that probably very little, if 
 any more, would come by the proposed road than now come 
 by the present one. No good reason can be shewn why it 
 would—and all analogy is against the belief. But if a con¬ 
 siderable portion should go by the new road, and the whole 
 amount calculated upon from North Danvers were to be re¬ 
 alized, the amount could not exceed 7,000 or 8,000 tons. We 
 strike out Lynn and Saugus altogether, the proof being per¬ 
 fect that no freight could ever be profitably taken from either. 
 And not a particle of proof has been furnished that any could 
 be obtained from Salem—and it is absurd to suppose any. 
 The 30,000 tons of freight, therefore, dwindle down to about 
 7,000 or 8,000, and that would probably be an over-estimate; 
 the nature of the business done between Danvers and Boston 
 rendering baggage wagons a particularly convenient mode of 
 transportation. 
 
 But extravagant and unfounded as is this computation of 
 tonnage, the rate per ton is even more so. In the first esti¬ 
 mate. A, the net profit to the road of this freight is put at 
 $1 50 per ton, from Danvers and Salem, without deducting 
 the expenses of loading and unloading, 25 cents per ton; or 
 the amount payable to the Boston and Maine Kail-road Com¬ 
 pany, being another 25 cents per ton; which, in all, amounts 
 to 50 cents, leaving only $1—and from that must be taken 
 20 cents more to reduce it to the rate per ton at which the 
 present road now proposes to transport merchandise from 
 Salem,—making a deduction of 70 cents, or nearly one half 
 of their estimated receipts. And the like deduction is to be 
 made for the Lynn merchandise, set down at {^1 per ton, re¬ 
 ducing it to 50 cents per ton, or one half the estimate. 
 
 But here, too, as before remarked, after the evidence was 
 nearly all in, we were favored with another estimate as re¬ 
 markable in reference to the freight as it was in regard to the 
 increase of passengers—marked B.* The freight from North 
 
 See Appendix. 
 
57 
 
 and South Danvers, in the first estimate, were 13,000 tons; 
 but by the second the freight of Danvers and towns adjoin¬ 
 ing is trumped up to 30,000 tons; while Lynn and Saugus, 
 which before gave 12,000, are now magnified to 15,000, by a 
 dash of the pen. This change was also made necessary for 
 the reason that Salem was stricken off, and the need that oc¬ 
 curred of a substitute; and so Danvers and Saugus are made 
 not only to nearly double their population in a few days, but 
 to bring forth .full grown men, who are instantly set up in 
 trade and double their business also. This beats Jupiter 
 and Minerva “all hollow.” His head could produce one 
 woman only in simple armor, while 30,000 men jump from 
 the head of the counsel in this case, all furnished with tan- 
 pits and hides, lap stones and hammers, and four horsed bag¬ 
 gage wagons, all in full operation. But they want one es¬ 
 sential attribute of the true yankee: as in order to make out 
 his profits the gentleman makes them willing to pay $1 per 
 ton for transportation, when they could get it done for 80 
 cents; and this is certainly fatal to any faith in any part of 
 his estimate. 
 
 And then comes the third, and final estimate, marked C, 
 unless the counsel shall hand in another before 1 sit down; * 
 in which, while he sticks to the number of tons, he raises 
 the price, putting his freight at ,$1 10 per ton instead of $1, 
 being 30 cents more than the present road charges. And 
 here, for the first time, lie allows any thing to the Boston 
 and Maine road, for the use of their roads, depot and motive 
 power, which he puts down at 20 cents, instead of 25, which 
 the evidence shows will be the least that can be charged. 
 
 It is hardly conceivable that the absurdity of these esti¬ 
 mates can need further exposure, yet a few simple compari¬ 
 sons may elucidate it still more glaringly. The amount of 
 freight in these two last estimates,' 45,000 tons, is equal to 
 one third of that brought through upon the great Western 
 road,—approaches one third of all on the Lowell, Boston and 
 Maine, Nashua and Lowell, and Concord Rail-roads put to¬ 
 gether. The receipts are computed at $45,750—being more 
 than one half of the receipts of the Boston and Providence 
 
 Which was done. 
 
58 
 
 road and all its branches; and is about three fourths of all 
 between Lowell and Boston. It exceeds three times the 
 whole amount received by the New Bedford and Taunton 
 roads. There can, therefore, be no reasonable reliance placed 
 upon these estimates, either in regard to numbers or quanti¬ 
 ties. 
 
 But assuming that these estimates of the amount of busi¬ 
 ness that would be done upon the road were correct, even 
 then it is manifest that at the rates of fare that must be 
 taken, and with the expenses that must be incurred, the con¬ 
 struction of the road would result in disastrous and ruinous 
 loss. It is remarkable that petitioners have offered no proof 
 upon either of these subjects; not a witness to shew what 
 rate of fare is usual or practicable, or what the expenses of 
 running and maintaining the road are. All is mere sugges¬ 
 tion,—mere -paper estimate, and varied to suit the occasion. 
 The remonstrants, however, have introduced the best possi¬ 
 ble evidence upon these subjects, and placed both beyond 
 reasonable doubt. 
 
 And first as to expenses. The petitioners at first estimated 
 these at $30,000 and now place them at $37,500. We have 
 shewn that the expenses at the lowest possible estimates, 
 cannot be less than $50,000 annually, for the same accom¬ 
 modation now afforded, or $37,500 if running four passen¬ 
 ger and one freight trains daily, being three less than are now 
 run on the existing road, computing the expense at 46 cents 
 per mile,—being less by 22 cents than the average of eleven 
 rail-roads now in operation, which is 68 cents per mile. (See 
 Chase’s statement No. 1, Appendix.) And the estimates so 
 carefully and skilfully made by Mr. Chase, an experienced 
 superintendent, and which there has been no attempt to dis¬ 
 prove, show conclusively that allowing all that petitioners 
 claimed in the first estimates, for passengers and freight, 
 and deducting the necessary expenses computed at the lowest 
 rates, and the amounts to be paid to the Boston and Maine 
 Rail-road Company, and there must be a great loss whether 
 the new corporation should run eight trains or five only. 
 That in running eight trains the expenses would exceed the 
 income by about $16,500; and in running five, by about 
 $5,000, to be added to the loss of the whole interest upon 
 
59 
 
 the capital. (Chase’s statement No. 2.) And that fairing 
 the absurdly extravagant estimates of freight and passengers 
 put in at the close of the case, there would be still a loss in 
 running the eight trains daily of about $5,500, and a sur¬ 
 plus only of about $5,000, in running five trains, being less 
 than 2 per cent, on the capital invested. (Chase’s statement 
 No. 3.) 
 
 While the computations of Mr. Neal, as able and expe¬ 
 rienced in these matters as any man in the country, shew 
 still more unfavorable results. They being based upon the 
 original statement of the business, and showing a dead loss 
 of $32,825, assuming that the whole amount of business 
 should be realized, a loss of $50,850, allowing all that could 
 be possibly anticipated,—and a still greater one if the com¬ 
 petition should produce reduction in rates of fares. (Pa¬ 
 per E.) 
 
 It will be recollected that in the estimates offered by the 
 remonstrants, they have been supported by the testimony, 
 not only of Mr. Neal, the president of their corporation, and 
 Mr. Chase the former superintendent, but by the superinten¬ 
 dents of three other roads, Mr. Storrow, Mr. Lee and Mr. 
 Parker, and contradicted by no one. 
 
 But the counsel has adverted to the expenses of the Ded¬ 
 ham Branch Rail-road, which Mr. Lee stated is run for 
 $6000 annually as a branch, and might be rim as an inde¬ 
 pendent road for $12,000, as showing that the proposed road 
 can be managed more cheaply. But in the first place, it runs 
 only half the number of passenger trains proposed to be run 
 on the petitioners’ road. In the second place, nothing is 
 charged for loading or unloading of merchandise, which is 
 25 cents per ton, and which on the proposed road, at the es¬ 
 timates of 45.000 tons, would itself amount to $11,250. And 
 in the third, this estimate includes nothing for repairs of road 
 from the junction to Boston. 
 
Thus the loading and unloading would be . $11,250 
 
 The additional passenger trains, say 44 miles at 32 cts. 4,407 
 Repairs of track, at $400 per mile, which is less than 
 the average, ..... 3,200 
 
 18,857 
 
 To be added to the .... 12,000 
 
 Making ...... $30,857 
 
 Instead of $12,000. 
 
 So he adverts to the Taunton and New Bedford, 
 
 which he says is run for - $24,180 
 
 But loading and unloading merchandise is not in¬ 
 cluded, say on 45,000 tons, - 11,250 
 
 And the two additional passenger trains, being 
 for 80 miles a day at 46 cents, - - 11,518 
 
 Making the expense - $46,SOS 
 
 The returns of the Fitchburg road present no criterion,— 
 that being an unfinished road, not including the general ex¬ 
 penses of 12 cents per mile run, which by Mr. Chase’s esti¬ 
 mates are shewn to be the average, and 12, 9 0 cents for repairs 
 of road, adding which would make the running expenses of 
 that road among the highest on the list. 
 
 We submit, therefore, that the petitioners have not only 
 failed entirely in their attempts to prove that they could main¬ 
 tain their road, if built,—but that the proof is clear and con¬ 
 clusive, that it would result in ruinous loss. But there is 
 proof, that the computations of the petitioners are essentially 
 erroneous as to the cost of constructing their road, and the 
 number of persons they must employ. Their estimates were 
 based upon running directly over the Boston and Maine road 
 to Boston, with their own engines. But it is now shewn that 
 their locomotives must stop at the junction, and they must 
 have a depot, and engine house, and apparatus there, which 
 will add greatly to the cost of their road, and of its mainte¬ 
 nance, and is so much more to be added to the ruinous result 
 of the proposed enterprise. While to that, again, must be 
 added the still further expenses always accruing for acci- 
 
61 
 
 dents.—damages to passengers and freight, fire risks of depots, 
 cars, engines, and buildings on the line, and the other inci¬ 
 dental charges, which, though not susceptible of enumeration, 
 are sure to occur. And to this, again, the extra expenses for 
 irregularities, in quantities of freight, to be transported at dif¬ 
 ferent times, greatly increasing the cost of transportation. 
 All the calculations on that subject, now put in, being upon 
 the supposition of their going equally both ways, and at all 
 times, which is obviously impossible. 
 
 Some allusion was made in the early part of the case to 
 the agreement entered into between the Boston and Maine 
 Rail-road Company and the remonstrants, concerning the 
 rates of fare on their two roads. It has been proved, that 
 this was entered into, because of their union at South Ber¬ 
 wick, to avoid the evils of parallel and competing roads; 
 and, upon inspection, it will be found to be in good faith to 
 the public and just to each other. It. is not perceived what 
 use is intended to be made of it. But if it be to shew, that 
 the remonstrants would be prevented thereby from diminish¬ 
 ing their fares between Salem and Boston, so as to compete or 
 interfere with the proposed road; then, we say, first, that, as 
 the other fares on the existing road, below Salem, are higher 
 than that agreement requires, the remonstrants may still make 
 a deduction on those between Salem and Boston, if desirable. 
 
 2dly. It is in the power of the commisioners appointed un¬ 
 der the agreement, to alter the rates of fare, if an exigency 
 should require it; and the interference, of the proposed roads, 
 should its proprietors attempt to establish lower rates of fare, 
 would be considered one calling for such alteration. 
 
 3dly. The connection of the Boston and Maine Rail-road 
 with that of the petitioners, by any agreement between the 
 corporations, enabling the latter to reduce the fares, would 
 be a fraud on the Eastern Rail-rpad Company, in violation 
 of the contract, which would discharge the remonstrants from 
 their obligations under it. 
 
 4thly. If the State should compel a junction between the 
 proposed road and the Boston and Maine road, upon terms 
 that should enable the latter to withdraw custom from the 
 road of the remonstrants, that would operate as a virtual dis¬ 
 solution of the contract, being an act done by the supreme 
 
authority, tending to avoid the intent of the contract on both 
 sides, and to prevent the Eastern road from fulfilling it, on 
 their part. 
 
 Upon the whole evidence, therefore, we respectfully submit 
 that the prayer of the petition ought not to be granted. That 
 the charter desired would he against public policy, as tending 
 to establish a system of parallel rail-roads, alike ruinous to 
 those already in being, and calculated to prevent the construc¬ 
 tion of others hereafter. That it is called for by no public 
 exigency—it being manifest that equal or greater accommo¬ 
 dation could be afforded to the petitioners by a spur from the 
 present road. That, if successful, it would conflict directly 
 with the interests of the present road, by withdrawing a large 
 portion of its custom, and that principally relied upon at the 
 time of its construction. That it would be a violation of the 
 contract between the State and the remonstrants, contained 
 in or expressed by the Sth section of their charter, and of the 
 good faith of the State to them as the builders and proprie¬ 
 tors of a long line of road, which was undertaken chiefly in 
 reliance upon the custom which the petitioners, if successful, 
 would withdraw. And, finally, that there is no reason to 
 believe that the proposed road, if built, could ever defray the 
 expenses of its management, and much less yield any income 
 upon the capital invested in its construction and apparatus; 
 but, on the contrary, the evidence shews that it would result 
 in disastrous loss to the projectors. 
 
 One other topic* seems to demand at least a passing notice, 
 —the plea, so often urged on these occasions, of the advan¬ 
 tages of competition. Competition, we are told, is the secret 
 and soul of all enterprise and progress; that wherever it ex¬ 
 ists we behold the greatest advancement in economy, safety 
 and comfort; that monopoly begets annoyance, cupidity and 
 disregard of public safety and convenience; in short, that 
 the history of competition is but the history of improvement, 
 and that we have. only to establish competition, and we at 
 once obtain perfection,—or, at least, are travelling with rail¬ 
 road velocity towards it. 
 
 * A portion of these remarks were omitted in the delivery of the Argument, from want 
 
63 
 
 Now, this mode of argument is one of very easy adoption, 
 and does exceedingly well when all others fail; because 
 while it contains one general element of truth to stand upon 
 as a pedestal, it is so indefinite, and so independent of time 
 and circumstance, and so entirely irrespective of evidence,— 
 in short, so universally applicable, that it may be applied to 
 almost any one subject, and in almost any one case as well 
 as to any other. 
 
 The same may he said of fire,—the essential element in 
 the progress of all art and science and human comfort, from 
 the axe to the surgical knife, from the pane of glass to the 
 telescope, from the wheelbarrow to the locomotive engine. Its 
 history may emphatically be said to be the history of civili¬ 
 zation. But shall we therefore scatter it far and wide, and 
 spread its devouring flames over the whole earth. If the 
 history of fire be on one side the history of civilization, on 
 the other it is the history of destructive conflagration on land 
 and sea, of burning cities and blazing habitations, of widely 
 spread and destructive losses of property and life. 
 
 And so, if the' history of competition be on one hand the 
 history of improvement, it is upon the other the sad record of 
 restless aspiration, of broken friendships, of envious discon¬ 
 tents, of blasted public and private faith, of unblushing 
 frauds, of gambling speculations and ruined hopes. Com¬ 
 petition is indeed a great element in social life, that in the 
 present state of the human heart and mind seems essential to 
 advancement, and I am willing to concede all that its elo¬ 
 quent advocates can urge for its importance and influence. 
 I will allow that it is the fire of social enterprise, and as es¬ 
 sential to it as that element to the existence and progress of 
 civilization. Though all must admit that as a motive it is 
 base, compared with those springing from a sense of duty and 
 justice. But I would have it as I would fire—under control, 
 and kept within its due limits, and applied to its proper uses. 
 I would remember the old adage, applied to fire, that it is a 
 good servant but a bad master. I would use it as a means 
 of attempting something else, not regard it as an end to be 
 itself attained. 
 
 And here let it be observed that this Committee, or rather 
 the Legislature whom it represents, holds this mighty power 
 
as applied to this case and this subject, in its grasp, to be 
 used, guided and applied at its sole will. The influence of 
 competition, as applied to rail-roads, is wholly within the 
 control of the Legislature. They can create, modify, or de¬ 
 stroy it at pleasure; and with all humility and deference I 
 would suggest, that no occasion ever has existed, or probably 
 ever will again exist, when a more solemn responsibility has 
 rested, or will rest, upon the Legislature, in their exercise of 
 this power. 
 
 The spirit of competition and of speculation are insepara¬ 
 bly connected in all these enterprises. The anticipated profit 
 of investments in the stocks,—of the advance of the value of 
 real estate in villages and towns or local sections of them,— 
 the imagined mines of wealth supposed to be in some wharf 
 lot, or waste territory, that may be made a terminus or a de¬ 
 pot,—the fancied increase of trade, and profits of trade, that 
 are to accrue'from the new facilities for transportation, and 
 the influx of travellers ! These, and countless other imagi¬ 
 nations, fill the minds of the ardent and credulous with ex¬ 
 aggerated hopes, and furnish ample means to the crafty and 
 designing to multiply dupes, while they excite a desire and 
 zeal for speculation and competition, which if permitted to 
 rage uncontrolled, threaten to sweep again like a blasting 
 pestilence over our land. This devastating mania has alrea¬ 
 dy exhausted the wilderness of the East and the prairies of 
 the West, and buried there many fair fortunes and the com¬ 
 forts and hopes of many happy homes; and has sent, and is 
 sending, many of grey hairs in sorrow to the grave, on whose 
 descent there the sunshine of competency and contentment 
 might otherwise have shone. Nor is this all, nor the worst; 
 it has laid prostrate there the honor and good faith of thous¬ 
 ands and tens of thousands of its victims. The same mania 
 has also exhausted the field of fancy stock jobbing, until cre¬ 
 dulity and gullibility can no longer be brought to lay their 
 wealth or their hard earnings at the feet of desperate gam¬ 
 blers and incorporated swindlers. But if the signs of the 
 times are to be understood, this love of speculation has 
 neither been gorged nor destroyed, but is now taking a new 
 direction, and is lighting upon rail-road stocks as its next 
 subject. And it may be well for those in power to pause and 
 
65 
 
 reflect, whether the grant of these numerous petitions may 
 not tend to encourage and promote this spirit; and not only 
 so, but likewise at the expense and to the ruin of those who 
 have invested their property upon the supposed faith of the 
 Legislature. 
 
 In reference to the petition of Mr. Valentine and others, 
 the remonstrants object to any connection of the proposed 
 road of the petitioners with theirs—because they allege that 
 such connection, if their road should be successful, would be 
 a direct violation of the rights of the remonstrants, by cutting 
 off a most important portion of their custom at their princi¬ 
 pal terminus: and be, to that extent, to all intents and pur¬ 
 poses, a parallel road. That there can be no good reason for 
 granting to others a new road, with liberty to connect with 
 that of the remonstrants, merely for the purpose of affording 
 an imaginary advantage at another depot. That upon the 
 hypothesis of these petitioners, there would be the same rea¬ 
 son for granting new roads from different parts of the city, to 
 intersect the Lowell, Worcester and Providence roads. That 
 such connection would expose the remonstrants to great de¬ 
 lays in receiving and discharging passengers or cars at the 
 junction,—and to great expenses and loss of motive power, 
 in the necessity they would constantly be under of being pro¬ 
 vided with sufficient motive power for any emergency, when 
 less would oftentimes or generally be sufficient;—and to 
 other great annoyances, delays and expenses, which always 
 attend such connections. And deeming it plain that no pub¬ 
 lic exigency exists for such a road, they decline entering fur¬ 
 ther upon the subject. 
 
 9 
 
NOTE BY THE PRINTERS. 
 
 In printing the-argument of Mr. Loring, from his notes as prepared for delivery and 
 not for publication, and in the hurry with which the work was forced through the press, 
 the following errors have escaped correction, which the reader is requested to notice. 
 
 Page 9, line 8 from the bottom, read "or ” for and.” 
 
 “ 9, “ 7 from the bottom, transpose the words " thrift” and “ honesty.” 
 
 " 10, “ 22, read “number,” for “numbers.” 
 
 “ 19, “ 3, for “ the investment,” read “ this movement.” 
 
 " 25, “ 4 from the bottom, read “ draws,” for “ days.” 
 
 “ 41, “ 4, for “ misuse of the,” read “ misuse of them for.” 
 
 “ 55, “ 11, for « §9,500,” read « §500.” 
 
 “ 57, “ 1, read “ was,” for “ were.” 
 
 " 60, for “ §46,868,” read “ §46,948.” 
 
APPENDIX, 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 Mr. Neal’s estimate of expenses of running the road. —E. 
 
 Current expenses of a road 174 miles long, with a spur (requiring a sepa¬ 
 rate engine and train), of 34 miles—total 21 miles, of which-4 miles is kept 
 in order by another company. 
 
 Suppose it to give the same accommodation that the present Eastern 
 Rail-road now does—7 passenger and 1 merchandize trains per day, it must 
 run 21X16X313=105,768 miles per annum. On the most economical es¬ 
 tablishment possible, and without having a man and engine or a car to 
 spare, there will be required, 
 
 1 Superintendent, per annum, .... $1,000 00 
 
 1 Treasurer, ...... 800 00 
 
 1 Clerk,. 500 00 
 
 3 Depot and Ticket Masters, at §30, per month, each, . 1,080 00 
 
 2 Switch men, . . ' . . ■ • 720 00 
 
 3 Brakemen, ...... 1.080 00 
 
 (All of which will be required with 5 or 8 trains.) 
 
 4 Engine men at $60 per month, .... 2,880 00 
 
 4 Fireman “ 30 “ .... 1,440 
 
 4 Conductors “40 “ . • • ■ 1,920 
 
 3 Baggage Masters at $35 “ .... 1,260 
 
 $12,680 00 
 
 Average expense of the following items on the Eastern Rail-Road for the 
 past six months , vis: 
 
 Fuel for locomotives, per mile, . . cts. 9.289-1000 
 
 Maintainance of way, . . 
 
 Repairs of cars, 
 
 Oil for cars, .... 
 
 Repairs of engines, . 
 
 Oil, tallow, and packing for do. . 
 
 28.963-1000 
 
 Station expenses, (exclusive of wages,) . 1.769 
 
 Office establishment, “ “ “ . 1.961 
 
 4.269 
 
 .297 
 
 2,954 
 
 10 
 
 32.693-1000 
 
 § 8 § 
 
70 
 
 Say 32 2-3 cents,—105,168 miles .... $34,354 88 
 
 Less, 4 miles,x 16X313=19,968 on which for 
 maintenance of way, at 11.386-1000 cts. pr mile, is 2,273 54 
 
 $32,081 34 
 
 Allow 5 engines to cost, . . . 32,400 00 
 
 “ 7 passenger cars, . . . 12,600 00 
 
 “ 35 freight “ ... 21,000 00 
 
 66,000 00 
 
 Annual deterioration and renewal, 10 per ct. , . 6,600 00 
 
 Renewal of track,. 1,700 00 
 
 40,381 34 
 
 Estimate of wages brought forward, . . . 12,680 00 
 
 Gross amount,.$53,061 34 
 
 If 6 trains or less be run, it is possible that there might be 
 dispensed with, 1 engineman, 1 conductor, 1 fireman, and 1 
 baggage master. 
 
 Aggregate of whose wages is, . . . $1,980 00 
 
 And, (supposing the expenses per mile to be ' 
 the same on the less as on the greater) 
 deduct number of miles run by 2 trains, 
 
 21X4X313=26,292X32 2-3=8,588 72 
 
 And wear and tare of 1 engine and track, . 800 00 
 
 Expense of 6 trains,.$41,892 62 
 
 But, if only 4 passenger and 1 merchandise trains, 
 
 deduct . . 21X2X313=13,146X32 2-3=4,294 36 
 
 Annual cost of operating the road, 5 trains, . . $37,598 26 
 
 The foregoing statement -was submitted to William Parker, Esq., 
 Superintendent of the Worcester Rail-Road, Charles Storrow, Esq , 
 Superintendent of the Lowell Rail-Road, and William R. Lee, Esq., 
 Superintendent of the Providence Rail-Road. 
 
 Mr. Parker testified : “ My own opinion is, that, should no more than 5 
 trains be run each way, the actual expense, if fairly computed, would reach 
 $50,000 at least.” 
 
71 
 
 Mr. Storrow testified: “ I have no hesitation in saying, that the aggre¬ 
 gate $53,061 34 is decidedly a low estimate, and that if a company could 
 contract to have the service performed, and the depreciation of the cars and 
 engines and road made good by paying that sum, it would be a very advan¬ 
 tageous bargain for them.” 
 
 Mr. Lee testified: “ Generally the estimate is low, and less than the experi¬ 
 ence of any Road terminating in Boston, or indeed located in the Com¬ 
 monwealth.” 
 
 Mr. Chase’s Estimate, No. 1. 
 
 Expenses of operating a Rail-road 194 miles long, calculating on 7 
 passenger, and 1 freight trains each way, daily,— 
 
 313 days x 16=5,008 trips of 19J miles each=97,656 miles; 
 of these, jggy^les \ run for frei S ht ’ and effi mile's \ for P assen S ers - 
 
 Average cost per mile of running trains on 11 Massachusetts Rail-roads, 
 in 1844, 68 68-100 cents; highest, 108 59-100, Nashua and Lowell; 
 lowest, 44 25-100, Boston and Maine. 
 
 97,656 miles, ran by trains at 46 cents.$44,921 56 
 
 Depreciation,. 5,520 00 
 
 Or $2,587 12 per mile of road=$50,441 56 
 
 Or, calculated by No. of passengers and tons of freight, as follows: 
 
 30,000 S. Danvers p 
 12,000 N. Danvers 
 30,000 Lynn 
 10,000 Saugus 
 10,000 other towns 
 
 92,000 
 
 Passengers. 
 agers carried 16 miles, 
 : “ 19J “ 
 
 ‘ “ 10 “ 
 
 ‘ “ 8 “ 
 
 c « 15 «, 
 
 Equal to carrying 1,244,000 passengers 1 mile. 
 
 480,000 
 
 234,000 
 
 300,000 
 
 80,000 
 
 150,000 
 
 1,244^000 
 
 By running passenger trains 85,449 miles, which is equal to carrying 
 14 56-100 passengers over the whole road each trip; 14 56-100 passengers, 
 at 3 cents each, per mile, is 42J cents per mile for the train; and 1,244,000 
 passengers carried one mile, at 3 cents, is . . . . $37,320 00 
 
72 
 
 Freight. 
 
 10,000 Tons S. Danvers, carried 16 miles, 160,000 tons 1 mile. 
 
 7,000 “ N. Danvers “ 194 “ 136,000 “ 1 “ 
 
 10,000 “ Lynn, “ 10 “ 100,000 “ 1 “ 
 
 2,000 “ Saugus, “ 8 “ 16,000 “ 1 “ 
 
 29,000 412,500 
 
 Equal to carrying 412,500 tons 1 mile, or 21,654 tons through. 
 
 By running trains 12,207 miles, which is equal to carrying 
 33 8-10 tons over the whole road each trip; and 33 8-10 tons 
 at 14 cents per mile, is 50 7-10 per mile for the train. 
 
 412,500 tons carried 1 mile, at 14 cents, is . . . . 6,187 50 
 
 Depreciation on 4 Engines, 
 
 4 Passenger Cars, 
 
 40 Freight Cars, 
 
 #49,027 50 
 
 24,000 
 
 7,200 
 
 24,000 
 
 Note.— 29,000 tons carried in 620 trips, obliges arrangements to be made for at 
 least 00 or 70 tons in some trips—it is actually 46J tons eaclt trip, carried for larger 
 or shorter distance, and would probably vary from 30 to 70 tons to a trip. (Freight 
 on Western Rail-road in 1844=43j tons through each train.) 71,581 tons through. 
 
 Same Road, calculating on 4 Passenger and 1 Freight Train each loay, daily. 
 Expenses Permanent. 
 
 Maintenance of way, 11 386-1000 cents on 61,035 miles, . #6,949 44 
 
 4 Depot Masters, at #30 per month,. 1,440 00 
 
 2 Switch-men, at $30 “ “. 720 00 
 
 4 Laborers, at #25 “ “. 1,200 00 
 
 Superintendent, Treasurer, Clerk, office expenses, printing, 
 advertising, &c. 3,000 00 
 
 $13,309 44 
 
 Which sum divided by 61,035 miles, is 21.80-100 cts. per mile. 
 
 Deduct permanent expenses from $44,921 56, amount of expenses when 
 8 trains are run, at 46 cents per mile, and there remains #31,612 12 for 
 expenses depending on trains, which, on 97,656 miles is 32 37-100 cents 
 per mile. 
 
73 
 
 Cost per mile of permanent expenses when 5 trains are run, 21 80-100. 
 Cost of train expenses per mile, . . . . . 32 37-100. 
 
 Making cost per mile of running 5 trains per day, . . 54 17-100. 
 
 313 daysxlO trips of 19J miles each, is 61,035 miles; 
 of these, \ runfor freight, and Jg 2 3 4 8 mfles \ for P assen S ers ' 
 
 61,035 miles, run by trains at 54 17-100, is . . . $33,062 66 
 
 Depreciation of engines and cars, . . . 4,920 00 
 
 Or $1,947 82 per mile of road=$37,982 66 
 
 Or, calculating by amount of passengers and freight: 
 
 Passengers, as before, equal to carrying 1,244,000, one mile; by run¬ 
 ning trains 48,828 miles, equal to 25 48-100 passengers over the whole road 
 each trip. 25 48-100 passengers, at 2 1-8 cents per mile, is 54 14-100 cents 
 per mile for the train; and 1,244,000 passengers 1 mile, at 2J cents, 
 
 is.$'26,435 00 
 
 Freight, as before,. 6,187 50 
 
 3 Engines, . 18,000 
 
 4 Passenger Cars, 7,200 
 40 Freight Cars, 24,000 
 
 $49,200 depreciation 10 per cent 4,920 00 
 
 $37,542 50 
 
74 
 
 Mr. Chase’s Estimate — No. 4. 
 
 Estimate of Operating a Rail-road 17j miles long, with a Spur 3i miles. 
 
 7 passenger and 1 freight trains, each way, is, . 105,168 miles. 
 
 At 46 cents,.$48,377 28 
 
 Add depreciation on 4 engines, . $24,000 
 
 6 passenger cars, 10,800 
 
 40 freight cars, . 24,000 
 
 $ 58,800 at 10 pr ct. 5,880 00 
 
 $54,257 28 
 
 $2583 70. running expense per mile of length of road. 
 
 4 passenger and 1 freight trains, each way, is 65,730 miles, 
 
 at 54 17-100 cts. . . " . . . $ 35,605 94 
 
 Add depreciation on 3 engines, at $6000, $ 18,000 
 
 8 pass’r cars, 1800, 14,400 
 
 40 freight cars, 400, 24,000 
 
 $ 56,400 at 10 pr ct. 5640 00 
 
 $41,245 94 
 
 $ 1,964 running expenses per mile of length of road. 
 
 John ir. Proctor’s Statement as published. 
 
 From South Danvers, 100 per day, equal to 30,000 a year, at 
 
 30 cents,.$9000 
 
 From North Danvers, 10,000 a year, at 35 cts. . . 3500 
 
 From New Mills, 2000 a year, at 35 cts. . . . 700 
 
 From Lynn, 100 per day, equal to 30,000 a year, at 20 cts. . 6000 
 
 From Saugus, 10,000 a year, at 20 cts. . . . 2000 
 
 From adjoining towns, say 10,000, at 25 cts. . . . 2500 
 
 Merchandise. 
 
 From South Danvers, 10,000 tons, at $ 1 50, . . . $ 15,000 
 
 From North Danvers, 4,000 “ 1 50, . . . 6000 
 
 From New Mills, 3,000 “ 1 50, . . . 4500 
 
 From Lynn, 10,000 “ 1 00, . . . 10,000 
 
 From Saugus, 2,000 “ 1 00, . . . 2000 
 
 Estimated amount of Income, .... $61,200 
 
75 
 
 Mr. Chase's Estimate , No. 2, of same busmess. 
 
 INCOME. 
 
 30,000 Passeng 
 10,000 
 2,000 
 30,000 
 10,000 
 10,000 
 
 from South Danvers, 
 “ North Danvers, 
 “ New Mills, 
 
 “ Lynn, 
 
 “ Saugus, 
 
 “ Other Towns, 
 
 at 40 c 
 at 46 i 
 at 25 i 
 at 20 i 
 at 30 i 
 
 $ 12,000 
 
 2,000 
 
 3,000 
 
 $30,020 
 
 Deduct for use of Track from Malden to Boston, and Depot ac¬ 
 commodations in Boston, 12 1-2 each on 92,000 passengers, 11,500 
 
 MERCHANDISE. 
 
 10,000 Tons South Danvers, 
 4,000 “ North Danvers, 
 
 3,000 “ New Mills, 
 
 10,000 “ Lynn, 
 
 2,000 “ Saugus 
 
 at 80 cents, . 
 at 90 cents, 
 at 60 cents, . 
 at 50 cents, . 
 
 $8,000 
 
 6,300 
 
 6,000 
 
 1,000 
 
 $21,300 
 
 Deduct for use of Track from Malden to Boston, and 
 Depot accommodations in Boston, 25 cents each 
 
 on 29,000 Tons.7,250 
 
 - 14,050 
 
 #32,570 
 
 Expenses of 8 Daily Trains, .... .$49,027 50 
 
 Expenses of 5 Daily Trains,. 37,542 50 
 
 From these expenses there should perhaps be deducted the 
 item of maintenance of way on 4 miles ffom Malden to 
 Boston, if the Main Road should keep this in repair, al¬ 
 though I think the compensation to the Main Road is 
 small enough without this. 
 
 This item would amount on 8 Trains per day, 8 1-10 per 
 
 mile to., . . $ 1624 00 
 
 This item would amount on 5 Trains per day, 12 97-100 per 
 
 mile to.$ 1624 00 
 
76 
 
 Maintenance of way on 
 
 11 Massachusetts Sail Soads— 
 
 1844. 
 
 
 Length Double 
 
 
 Lowell, 
 
 26 26 
 
 
 Boston and Maine, 
 
 56 
 
 
 Providence, 
 
 42 
 
 
 Worcester, 
 
 44 44 
 
 
 Charlestown Branch, 
 
 7 
 
 
 Eastern, 
 
 54 9 
 
 
 Nashua and Lowell, 
 
 16 
 
 
 Taunton and New Bedf 
 
 rd, 20 
 
 
 Norwich and Worcester 
 
 66 
 
 
 Taunton Branch, 
 
 11 
 
 
 Western, 
 
 156 
 
 
 
 498 79 
 
 
 Add 1-2 double track. 
 
 40 
 
 
 Miles,.. 
 
 538 ) $218,579 ( $406 per mile. 
 
 J. W. Proctor's Estimate. — A. 
 
 
 Sooth Danvers, 100 passeng 
 
 »rs per day, or 30,000 per an- 
 
 
 num, at 30 cents, 
 
 
 $9,000 
 
 Merchandise, 10,000 tons, 
 
 at $150, 
 
 15,000 
 
 North Danvers, 10 passenger 
 
 per day, or 3,000 per annum, 
 
 
 at 33 cents, 
 
 
 1,000 
 
 Merchandise, 3,000 tons, a 
 
 $1 50, 
 
 4,500 
 
 Lynn, 100 passemrers per day. 
 
 r 30,000 per annum, at 20 cts, 
 
 6,000 
 
 Merchandise, 10,000 ton 
 
 s, at $1 00, . 
 
 10,000 
 
 Saogos, 20 passengers per day, 
 
 or 0,000 per annum, at 20 cts, 
 
 1,200 
 
 Merchandise, 2,000 tons, a 
 
 $1 00, 
 
 2,000 
 
 North Salem, 100 passengers 
 
 per day, or 30,000 per annum, 
 
 
 at 30 cents, 
 
 
 9,000 
 
 Merchandise, 5,000 tons, a 
 
 $1 50, 
 
 7,500 
 
 Adjoining Towns, 10,000 passengers per annum, at 30 cents, 
 
 3,000 
 
 Business between Danvers 
 
 and Salem, . 
 
 5,000 
 
 
 
 $73,200 
 
 Allow, for interest and superintendence, . $20,000 
 
 
 Expense of operating, $2,500 per mile, . 30,000 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 50,000 
 
 
 Excess, .... 
 
 $23,200 
 
77 
 
 Mr. Chase’s Estimate of same business . 
 
 Passenger Income. 
 
 30,000 passengers, South Danvers, at 40 cts. $ 12,000 
 
 3,000 “ 
 
 North Danvers, at 45 “ 
 
 1350 
 
 30,000 
 
 Lynn, at 25 “ 
 
 7500 
 
 6,000 
 
 Saugus, at 25 “ 
 
 1500 
 
 30,000 “ 
 
 North Salem, at 40 “ 
 
 12,000 
 
 10,000 “ 
 
 Adjoin’g towns, at 30 “ 
 
 3000 
 
 109,000 
 
 Deduct 12J cents on 109,000 passengers for \ 
 Boston & Maine Extension Road, . . \ 
 
 $37,350 
 
 13,625 
 
 Nett from passengers.$23,725 00 
 
 Merchandise Income. 
 
 10,000 tons, South Danvers, 
 
 at 80 cts. . 
 
 $8,000 
 
 3,000 
 
 North Danvers 
 
 at 90 “ 
 
 2,700 
 
 10,000 
 
 Lynn, 
 
 at 60 “ 
 
 6,000 
 
 2,000 
 
 Saugus, 
 
 at 50 “ 
 
 1,000 
 
 5,000 
 
 N. Salem, 
 
 at 80 “ . 
 
 4,000 
 
 30,000 
 
 
 
 21,700 
 
 Deduct 25 cents per ton on 30,000 tons, for ) 
 
 Boston & Maine Road, . . . J 7,500 
 
 - 14,200 00 
 
 Business between Salem and Danvers,. 5,000 00 
 
 $42,925 00 
 
 Passenger BusiNEss=to carrying 1,561,000 passengers one mile= in 8 
 trains, 16 97-100 through; and in 5 trains, 29 69-100 through, each trip. 
 
 Freight BusiNsss=to carrying 422,000 tons one mile=32 1-10 tons 
 through, each trip. 
 
 Expenses 8 trips per day,.$54,257 28 
 
 Add for additional freight train half the time, 6,572 miles, 
 at 32 37-100 . 2,127 35 
 
 $56,384 63 
 
78 
 
 Expenses 5 trips per day,.$ 41,245 94 
 
 Add for additional freight train half the time, 6,572 miles, 
 at 32 37-100,. 2,127 35 
 
 $43,373 29 
 
 8 trains per day cost $54,257 28 on 21 miles of road, is equal to 
 $2 583 70 per mile of road, per annum. 
 
 5 trains per day cost $41,245 94 on 21 miles of road, is equal to 
 $ 1,964 09 per mile of road, per annum. 
 
 30,000 tons of merchandise in 626 trips, averages 47 92-100 tons each 
 trip. 
 
 On Western Rail-road, 1844, averaged 43J tons through. 
 
 30,000 tons carried, as calculated, on Danvers and Salem road, averages 
 32 1-10 tons through. 
 
 No contingencies calculated for,—they may be: 
 
 Bad debts; 
 
 Accidents to Engines or Trains, 
 
 Fire risk of Engines, Cars, and Depot Buildings, 
 
 Damages to Freight carried, 
 
 Damages to Passengers injured, 
 
 Loss of Baggage, 
 
 Fire risk to Buildings near the road. 
 
79 
 
 Estimate of Business on the new proposed Rail-road from 
 Danvers Plains, to unite with the Maine Extension Road 
 at Malden. —B. 
 
 Entire distance, .... 15 miles 
 
 Entire cost, .... $275,000 
 
 Passengers from Danvers and towns adjoining, at 200 per day, 
 for 300 days, equal to 60,000 a year, at 30 cents each, ' . $18,000 
 
 Passengers from Lynn and towns adjoining, at 100 per day, for 
 300 days, equal to 30,000 a year, at 20 cents each, . . 6,000 
 
 Passengers from Saugus and towns adjoining, at33 per day, for 
 300 days, equal to 10,000 a year, at 20 cents each, . . 2,000 
 
 Other passengers from Salem and elsewhere, . . . 4,000 
 
 Receipts from passengers, ..... $30,000 
 
 Merchandise from Danvers and towns adjoining to the amount 
 of 30,000 tons a year, at $1.00 per ton, . . . 30,000 
 
 Merchandise from Lynn and Saugus to the amount of 15,000 
 tons, at 75 cents per ton, . . . . 11,250 
 
 Gross amount of receipts, ..... $71,250 
 
 Expenses. 
 
 Interest on the cost ...... $16,500 
 
 Superintendence of the road, &c., . . . . 2,500 
 
 Cost of running, &c., at $2,500 per mile, for 15 miles, . . 37,500 
 
 $56,500 
 
 Balance to meet repairs and contingencies, . . . $14,750 
 
 (Signed) J. W. PROCTOR, 
 
 For the Petitioners. 
 
80 
 
 Mr. Chase’s Estimate^ No, 3, of satire business. 
 
 INCOME, ACCORDING TO ESTIMATE OP MR. PROCTOR, OF MARCH 5TH. 
 
 60,000 passengers, Danvers, at 40 cents.$24,000 00 
 
 30,000 “ Lynn, “ 25 “ . . . . ■ 7,500 00 
 
 10,000 “ Saugus, “ 25 “ . . . . 2,500 00 
 
 10,000 “ oth’r t’wns, 40 “ 4,000 00 
 
 110,000 $38,000 00 
 
 Deduct m cents on 110,000 13,750 00 
 
 $24,250 00 
 
 30,000 tons merchandise, Danvers, at 85 cents, $25,500 00 
 
 15,000 “ “ Lynn, at 60 cents, . 9,000 00 34,500 00 
 
 45,000 $58,750 00 
 
 Deduct 25 cents per ton on 45,000, . . . . ' . 11,250 00 
 
 $47,500 00 
 
 45,000 tons in 626 trains, equal to 71 9-10 tons in each train, or 54 tons 
 over the whole road each trip. 
 
 To do this business, an additional freight train will be requisite, I think, 
 8 months per year, or 8138 miles run, at 50 cts. $4069 00, which should be 
 added to the expenses. 
 
81 
 
 Mr. Proctor’s Estimates for Income and Expenses of propo¬ 
 sed Road , based upon the Evidence submitted. —0. 
 
 Passengers from Danvers station, 60,000, at 40 cents, the redu¬ 
 ced fare on the Eastern Rail-road, . . 24,000 
 
 “ “ Lynn station, 30,000, at 25 cents, (do), . 7,500 
 
 “ “ Saugus station, 10,000, at 25 cents, (do), . 2,500 
 
 “ “ Towns adj’g Danvers, 10,000, at 40 cts, (do), 4,000 
 
 110,000 $38,000 
 
 Allow the Maine Extension Road on 110,000 passengers, 8 cents 
 each, (which is all that can be afforded while they oppose our 
 entrance,) ....... 8,800 
 
 Gross passenger income, ..... 29,200 
 
 Merchandise from Danvers station, 30,000 tons, at $1.10, 33,000 
 “ “ Lynn and Saugus stations, 15,000 
 
 tons, at 85 cents, . . 12,750 
 
 45,750 
 
 Allow the Maine Extension Road, on 45,000 tons, 20 
 cents a ton, ...... 9,000 
 
 - 37,750 
 
 Gross amount of income, ..... 66,950 
 
 We have added 25 cents to Mr. Chase’s estimate on freight per -ton, 
 because such is the actual opinion of those who have done the work for 
 eight years past, Mr. Barnes and others. 
 
 Expenses. 
 
 Cost of operating the Road, including superintendance and all 
 incidentals, according to the most approved experience, 15 
 
 miles, at $2,500 per mile, .... 
 
 . $37,500 
 
 Interest on cost of the Road, $275,000, at 6 per cent., . 
 
 16,500 
 
 
 $54,000 
 
 Gross amount of income, .... 
 
 66,950 
 
 Balance of income in favor of the Road, 
 
 . $12,950 
 
82 
 
 The foregoing estimate allows the Maine Extension Road, for the use of 
 4 miles of their Road and depot privileges sufficient for our business annu¬ 
 ally, $17,800, which is believed to be a larger sum than the Legislature 
 will exact of us. It takes all other things at the reduced prices of the East¬ 
 ern Rail-road. 
 
 We contemplate running 4 passenger trains and 1 merchandise train, at 
 a cost of $37,500. 
 
 Mr. Neal’s estimate of the cost for such trains is $37,598 26. 
 
 (So we are fortified from a source from which there can be no appeal.) 
 
 Taking the existing prices, one quarter part is to be added to the forego¬ 
 ing sum, making the net income $16,000. 
 
83 
 
of Re 
 
Major Leivis Allen's Statement. 
 
 Thefollowing is a Statement of the Number of Tons of Freight transported 
 between Boston and the South Parish of Danvers. 
 
 NAMES. 
 
 E. W. Upton, - 
 A. P. Phillips & Co 
 Lambert & Merrill, 
 
 J. M. C. Noyes & Co. 
 Francis Dane, 
 
 Ferren & King, - 
 Lord & Wiley, - 
 Danvers Iron' Works—M 
 HooDer. 
 
 Kendall Osborn, - 
 Henry Poor, 
 
 Andrew Porter, - 
 J. A. Lord, 
 
 Peirce & Perley, - 
 Henry B. Ward, - 
 Caleb Lowe, 
 
 Andrew Torr & Brother, 
 G. & B. Jacobs, Jr. 
 
 W. W. Little & Son, 
 Joseph Jacobs, 
 
 Obadiah Kimball, - 
 Charles Potter, 
 
 J. S. Hodgskins, - 
 Timothy Holmes, - 
 Franklin Osborn, - 
 Richard Smith, 
 
 John Reith, 
 
 Charles Brown, - 
 Stephen Blaney, - 
 Orlando Soutlnvick, 
 
 J. & T. Hardey, - 
 U. N. Lord, 
 
 Stephen Fernald, - 
 J. B. Little, 
 
 D. A. Townsend, - 
 William Dalton, - 
 Benjamin Wheeler, 
 
 Oliver Saunders, - 
 J. M. DeMerritt, - 
 Lewis Elliott, 
 
 Thomas Trask, - 
 Wingate Merrill, - 
 William Sutton, • 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF FREIGHT. 
 
 Tons. 
 
 Hides, Glue and Glue Stuff, 
 Shoes, Leather, &c. - 
 Groceries, Hardware, &c. 
 Leather and Shoes, - 
 
 Groceries, Dry Goods, &c. 
 Iron and Tin, - 
 
 250 
 
 70 
 
 44 
 
 40 
 
 30 
 
 ! Iron, Coal, Steal, &c. 
 
 ! Hides and Leather, 
 j Hides, Leather snd Skins, 
 
 | Leather, 
 
 | do - - 
 
 Skins, Mor. Lining and Bindinj 
 i Various Articles, 
 j Hides and Leather, 
 
 
 : Shoes and Leather, - 
 : Leather, 
 
 i Seal Skins, Leather, &c. 
 
 : Hides and Leather, - 
 
 ; Various Articles, 
 
 1 Wool and Sheep Skins, 
 
 [ Sumac and Skins,' 
 
 ! Leather, (from their shop,) 
 j do - - 
 
 i do - 
 
 | Hides and Leather, - 
 
 Leather and Oil, 
 
 Iron and Coal, 
 
 Provisions, 
 
 do - - 
 
 Hides and Leather, - 
 
 Trunks, Harness. &c. 
 Various Articles, 
 
 Wool, Skins, &c. 
 
 1700 
 
 90 
 
 200 
 
 19 
 
 19 
 40 
 
 20 
 25 
 25 
 30 
 20 
 25 
 50 
 15 
 25 
 50 
 30 
 30 
 10 
 25’ 
 20 
 40 
 30 
 20 
 10 
 30 
 40 
 10 
 20 
 
 100 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 20 
 
 10 
 
 125 
 
87 
 
 NAMES. 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF FREIGHT. 
 
 Leonard Poole, - 
 Nathaniel Anable, 
 
 A. P. Batchelder, 
 Poole & Jacobs, - 
 Joseph Shaw, 
 
 Phelps & Woodbury, 
 Carter & Batchelder, 
 Blaney & Wilkins, 
 Joseph W. Cary, - 
 John C. Burbeck,- 
 R. S. Daniels, 
 
 David Daniels, 
 Daniels, Poor & Co. 
 Moses Dale, 
 
 William D. Joplin, 
 Joseph Shea, 
 
 Sylvester Osborn, Jr. 
 Calden & Forster, 
 Edward Fuller, - 
 Joseph Morrison, - 
 C. Ii. Manning, - 
 Ebenr. Meacom, - 
 James Perkins, 
 Sylvester Procter, Jr. 
 Jonathan W. Osborn, 
 Samuel A. Poole, 
 Stimpson & Floyd, 
 Hiram Plummer, - 
 John Hart, 
 
 John Dodge, 
 
 Asa Sawyer, 
 
 Joseph Fairfield, - 
 C. W. Osborn, - 
 Franklin Upton, - 
 A. H. Southwick, 
 Thomas Bancroft, 
 
 R. P. Tufts, 
 
 R. W. Merrill, - 
 Godwin & Holman, 
 Hanson & Roberts, 
 
 C. A. Dearborn & Co. 
 William Cutler, - 
 Caleb L. Frost, - 
 Several Individuals, 
 Nutting & Pender, 
 Anthoney Corey, - 
 Isaac Elliot, 
 
 Oliver Gordon, 
 Patterson & Ellis, 
 Benjamin Goodridge, 
 David Messer, 
 
 Hides and Leather, - 
 
 Leather, - 
 
 Sumac, Skins, &c. - 
 
 Tallow, Rosin, Barilla, 
 
 Machinery, Wood-work, &c. - 
 Groceries, Dry Goods, &c. 
 
 Paints, Oil, &c. 
 
 do do - - 
 
 Tallow, Rosin, &c. - - 1 
 
 Dry Goods, - 
 Shoes and Leather, - 
 Groceries, - 
 
 Iron, - 
 
 Dry Goods, Trees, &c. 
 
 Oysters, Fruit, &c. - 
 
 Groceries, - 
 
 Groceries, Dry Goods, &c. - 
 
 Shoes and Leather, - 
 
 Cabinet Work, 
 
 Shoes, &c. - 
 
 Machinery, - 
 Drugs, &c. - 
 
 Paints, Oil, Glass, &c. 
 Harness-work and Trunks, - 
 
 Flour, ... 
 
 Leather, - 
 
 Hides and Leather, 
 
 Iron and Coal, 
 
 Provisions, - - - 
 
 do 
 
 Hides and Leather, - 
 
 Crockery Ware, &c. - 
 Harness-work, 
 
 Groceries, 
 
 Rosin, Barilla, &c. 
 
 Provisions, - 
 
 Iron Castings, Rags, &c. 
 
 Dry Goods, - ' 
 
 Hides and Leather, - 
 Onions, Apples, Squashes, &c. 
 Sumac, Skins, &c. 
 
 Wooden-ware, Brooms, Mats, &c. 
 Provisions, - 
 
 do ... 
 
 do ... 
 
 47 
 
 30 
 
 17 
 
 330 
 
 100 
 
 200 
 
 50 
 
 25 
 
 20 
 
 10 
 
 25 
 
 175 
 
 100 
 
 60 
 
 10 
 
 100 
 
 50 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 12 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 25 
 
 37 
 
 17 
 
 25 
 
 30 
 
 45 
 
 20 
 
 12 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 . 60 
 1222 
 15 
 25 
 25 
 25 
 115 
 75 
 15 
 45 
 1792 
 25 
 25 
 4 
 25 
 25 
 
NAMES. 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF FREIGHT. 
 
 Tons. 
 
 Tapleyville, 
 
 Wool, Hemp, Groceries, Iron, &c. - 
 
 200 
 
 David Roberts, - 
 
 Leather, .... 
 
 60 
 
 Joseph Poor, 
 
 Hides and Leather, - 
 
 10 
 
 Joseph Poor, Jr. - 
 
 
 10 
 
 J. & T. Hardy, - 
 
 do do (from their Tan Yd.) 
 
 15 
 
 Lunt & Taylor, - 
 
 Machinery, - 
 
 20 
 
 
 Tons, --- 
 
 9355 
 
 There were raised in Danvers, the last year, 224,000 barrels of Onions, 
 two thirds of which were sent to Boston. It is estimated that there were 
 in Apples, Squashes, &c. about half as much as the above,—two thirds of 
 which, at 160 lbs to the barrel, is 1792 toife. Tapleyville is a small manu¬ 
 facturing village, sprung up rather between the North and South Parishes 
 in Danvers, where there is a-Carpet Factory, Line and Twine Factory, and 
 several small, but growing, establishments.