Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1852-02-27
tSGr the FIRE. P,eSS)
Colchester Bridge Again.

iO"h NlRtH.
Ear the FIRE. P,ess)
| Colchester Bridge Again
| GE% C,kRKE.
The mysterious absence OF "PrOgrsS s. a.
length solved. 1t now appears ibat be was wander.
ing among the tomJs in search OF srare. y.rd ecos
to prove something about bis bridge Indeed he
says himself, that he could employ his time 10 bet
ter advantage in somc olhcr qsartcr," ilan in lee
turing me ;-graned-and indeed be lad better have
gone to the moon, much less have cined Layard in
his researches tor the dusty records OF Nneyah than
to have exposed his weakness and foley, in publish
inI records that have nothing to % with the ques-
ton. For "humani,y's sahe,' wouid ike to know,
/ VIVA, the ling ni stamps and the lra-ing OF old
logs aud bushes owl OF our gra yard, has 10 do
with the building OF bridges Then, again, MS re-
cords showing he votes OF Colchester, irat 10 bud
and afterwards not to hNid, 'Sr bridge in question,
is a aoorcd effort 10 prove WIT nobody dst nicd--
truly he has laborcl Ike tie nonntam and broush,
forth mouSc
Again, who ever sav more complete dish cI
chnrder, OF iah fowl mutlon.o hops and turtle nll3-
ci up III the shape OF newspaper article than is e1-
hblted in Isis communication proper. ], lns neither
head nor tail, logic reason he aIks .tre about
| every thing and a5o'ss nothing in parlicd'ar-sayS
not word upOu the nuestian in issue, e. whether
proposed new road through Colchester would be
s iorfcy and 5cttcr Tran the :oad now in use,-but
turns this sI-ct OF by saying, chat he prefers
pres Mt to withhold his opinion about the road" A
strong ar.nu'"n' T.y. again:i the propreiy OF tho
vot" oi Colchester; and tor charging the town with
" nli.yrltion =" IL rp-n finds a mare S.ntsi, anu
says that --cd the petition 10 build the road as il
81, i,t.
slou Il he built thaye 10 recollection OF signing
such '"tr'lun; perhaps dad, bu, whr,hrT did or
did not j, Of l.e conscqucuct-al icsirc to say on
h. subject i that il somebody picked up my name,
when va net aware OF the facts in the case = S
now Oh knowledge ut ,le facts, at :..e ,Aa.nan-
nous pa; 81 opposing il.
~ 10 lie yute OF Dee. 2c-i7, ais own records
show, that it upon condition, that Burlington
vote also TO build her share ct the bridge and tina,
&. i. lleIeherg and others indemnify the town
against oil expenses above a tax OF 10 per CENT. on
tHe Grand List. Burlington ,bl, time refused 10
HH'd her share, unless the abuncnts and PIERS weic
buli ana competed by the people OF Colchester and
4 T.. tl"iu"hcrg acting the part OF prudent man,
! ncfer eNc'lrd MS bonds OF Indemnity to Colchester.
30 there The r4attcr dropped, and the charge ina.
Colchester "rtpudIa,cd" that vote, Is made with
. uuch grace.
[ line action OF the Own al l., TWO last meetings
has been explained, and needs no commen,-the rea-
son OF the vole at sle last meeting, however, viii be.
more fully shown by the accompanying comnunica.
Ion to you, from lhs town clerk OF Colchester
SOW, NJ: Editor. feel that your cormns have
been lui.e too much taxed already, with a DISCUSSION
which WIS not OF my own seeking, bot which | rr-
uctaully entered into, to dcay my town against an
. UNJUST assault. The suhtct cannot have much inter-
st with the great majority OF your readers, and
should regard it a. an unreasonable tax Il, on your
Kindness, to proIong the discussion Indeed ieIt
quite doubtful OH The point, whether | would say
word or not.
snail dIsns' the subject, and leave the whole
matter OF newspaper discussion, IN the hands ct
"PIoGrcsa"
\ ColtutsrER YorGR.
Ms Eegr.r.
Ina certificate si.qfsd by me, IN your Daily OF
February 2Oh relating to on rescinding the
vote passed Dee. 20, 1871. IL said that ii might be
the means OF road to connect with the Sand Bar
} Bridge" should have SAID It would be ihr means
p OF building new County ROAD, which the pubic
travel did not require, and would subject the town
to great expense, as the arguments used by those
y who addressed the Meeting were, that the public
travel did not require such road and the expense
the same would be enormous and such as the tcwn
t ought not to be compelled 10 pay. When wrote
tarar,icc ct Feb. lSA wrote It in great haste and
IT. perhaps 1t may convey wrong idea those who do
not understand the controversy now going on. as
one expected hut that ii there was bridge there
is must be road 70 it, and they believed tn ere wasal-
ready sufficient roads tor the accommodation Of the
public.
GEORGEP. MAYO,