342 Meyer—Early Railroad Legislation in Wisconsin. 
twenty-two (up to 1854); and the Baltimore and Ohio twenty- 
one (from 1828 to 1852). Not a few of these amendments were 
confined strictly to matters concerning only the railroad in ques¬ 
tion, and in these cases general legislation could not well have 
obviated certain special acts. However, by far the larger num¬ 
ber of amendments provided for such matters as an increase of 
stock, issuing bonds, holding lands, building a telegraph line, 
extending the road or building branches or making connections, 
building a bridge or straightening a road; and in such cases a 
comprehensive general law could not only have saved much time 
and expense, but it would have led to a more uniform and 
steady railroad policy. 
II. THE GENERAL RAILROAD BILL OP 1853. 
If the long array of charters, with all their omissions, incon¬ 
sistencies, and repetitions, granted before the first general act 
was passed by the Wisconsin legislature, gives us a somewhat 
displeasing impression as compared with contemporary legisla¬ 
tion in Eastern States, we must not forget that Wisconsin be¬ 
gan to build railroads twenty years later. And it seems to 
have been the rule not to profit much by the experience of other 
states, but to legislate loosely and indiscriminately until dis¬ 
aster should compel men to accept a more rational policy. Had 
Wisconsin learned anything from the experience of New York, 
Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and other states she would 
have begun with adequate general laws. European experience 
was before the country; but granting that that was not g ner- 
ally available, it seems difficult to find any good excuse for not 
profiting by the lessons of sister states. Wisconsin had become 
railroad-mad, and in her madness she had quarantined rational 
ideas outside of her legislative halls. If the “ Sons of New 
York ” had been able to lead to victory some of the legislative 
principles which their native state had tested, they would have 
saved Wisconsin from much political jobbery and financial dis¬ 
aster. The people of the state do not seem to have been hostile 
to general legislation. The press was unanimously in favor of 
the General Law when it was before the legislature. The pub- 
