of this young and flourishing commonwealth, and the fervent hope that her legislation and future policy will be such as to insure to her citizens the full enjoyment of civil and religious liberty-that she will discountenance civil discord and local animosities among the States of our Union, and concede to each and all, the rights which pertain to them under our national Constitution and laws, and that she will in every emergency defend that Union which has led our republic to honor and greatness. With these hopes and wishes for the welfare of Iowa and our common country, I retire from the office with which I have been honored. IOWA CITY, DECEMBER 8th, 1854. STEPHEN HEMPSTEAD. VETO MESSAGES TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FEBRUARY 4, 1851 From the Journal of the House of Representatives, p. 381 Gentlemen of the House of Representatives: I conceive it to be my duty under the constitution to return to you with my objections, an act authorizing F. J. Wheeling, M. H. Clark and their associates to erect a toll bridge across East Nishnabotany river; which was on this day presented for my approval. The first section of the act provides "that F. J. Wheeling and M. H. Clark and their associates be and they are hereby authorized to erect and keep a toll bridge across the East Nishnabotany river for the term of twenty years, with the exclusive privilege of bridging said stream one mile up and down said stream, from the point where the state roads from Ottumwa to Council Bluffs, and from Fort Des Moines to Kanesville crosses said stream." The act also establishes the rate of toll and authorizes the proper county "to purchase said bridge at the expiration of ten years from its completion, by paying a fair compensation for the same, but fixes no time when the bridge shall be completed. Does this act create a corporation, and if so is it for political or municipal purposes. To determine this question, let me observe that "a corporation may be defined to be a body of persons connected together by law, either con temporaneously or in succession, and endowed with the capacity of acting for one or various purposes as a single person. Corporations are also public and private. The act under consideration is of the latter class, as it is founded on private means for private benefit, whereby individuals have an interest distinct from that of the community; it is therefore not a political, municipal or public corporation. Apply these rules to the act in question and we find a body of persons connected by law, with the right of succession for twenty years and with the power of acting as one person for the purpose of constructing and keeping up a bridge for private gain. Upon examining the whole question, I am unable to avoid the conclusion that the act under consideration is intended and would create a private corporation. The second section of the ninth article of the constitution declares that "corporations shall not be created in this state by special laws except for political or municipal purposes; but the General Assembly shall provide by general laws for the organization of all other corporations, except corporations with banking privileges, the creation of which is prohibited." In compliance with this provision the General Assembly passed "an act authorizing general incorporations approved February 22d, 1847," now in force granting to every citizen the right of forming a company or association for the transaction of "any business which may be the lawful subject of a general partnership including the establishment of ferries, the construction of railroads and other works of internal improvement." The language and intention of the constitution cannot be mistaken, it asserts a great and just principle which is worthy of the highest consideration by those who are intrusted with legislative power, the object being to prevent special and partial legislation and place the citizens of this state upon an equality as to those privileges which should be equal to all. Is it necessary, is it desirable that the time of the Legislative Assembly should be consumed, and the money of the people expended in granting to private individuals for private gain, franchises and privileges of the character under consideration? Gentlemen, I leave the question for your determination, not doubting but that your decision will sustain and carry out the provisions of the constitution upon a question of so much importance to the the people of this state. FEBRUARY 4th, 1851. S. HEMPSTEAD. TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FEBRUARY 4, 1851 From the Journal of the House of Representatives, p. 384 Gentlemen of the House of Representatives: I am compelled to return to you with my objections, an act to authorise Winthrop Folsom and Gilman Folsom their heirs and successors to build a bridge across the Iowa river at Iowa City, on a continuation of Iowa avenue, which has this day been presented for my approval. For my objections to the passage of acts of this character, I respectfully refer you to my message of this date, disapproving "An act authorising F. J. Wheeling, M. H. Clark and their associates to erect a toll bridge across east Nishnebotany river." FEBRUARY 4th, 1851. S. HEMPSTEAD. TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES From the Journal of the House of Representatives, p. 384 Gentlemen of the House of Representatives: I herewith return to you "An act to authorise Robert Gower, James H. Gower, Jacob Shawver and Peter Dilts and others to erect a toll bridge across Cedar river, in Cedar county," which was this day presented for my approval. I believe this act to be a violation of the second section of the ninth article of the constitution, for the reasons assigned in my message of this date disapproving an act authorising F. J. Wheeling, M. H. Clark, and their associ ates to erect a toll bridge across east Nishnebotany river, to which I respectfully refer you. FEBRUARY 5th, 1851. S. HEMPSTEAD. |