Worcester daily spy., 1858-07-31

The people Of Worcester have supposed there
had been provided for them, by the hberality Of
the city authorities, at the expense Of their (the
peoples) pockets. public park where they might
resort for their own cCmiort, and where their
! lives and limbs might be safe. Such a SUPPOSE
tion does not seem to be well founded. The
Common or Park is used more for railroad pur-
poses than anything else, and has become a COM
mon switching ground for railroad corporations.
| The most public tharoughiare in the city is con
tnuelly blocked up and foot passengers cannot,
either with comfort or safety cross upon the
| Common The rails on the Common are an in
| tolersbie nuisance-a common nuisance, IN more
! than one sense of that word, Judge Shaw's
| opinion. in regard to the method of abatiDg nui-
sances in the form Of liquor shops, might, with
advantage to the city, be applied in this case.
Some people think the rails on the Common
| are kept there without right and Illegally. the
corporations having, in many instances. violated
| the conditions upon which the rails put
down. Will some one who knows the facts state
by what AUTHORITY, and upon what conditions, the
| Norwich and Worcester, or any other corpora
ton, runs locomotives and over the public
Common INQUIRER
July %, 1858.
We think correspondent, "Inquirer," Is
unnecessarily severe and unjust in his comments
upon the crossing of the Common by the track of
the Norwich and Worcester Railroad While we
agree with him, that it would be desirable to have
the Common free from membranes, it seems to
us that there be no question as to the right
Of the Norwich and Worcester corporation in the
premises. They have possession of the right Of
way, in accordance with the provisions of the
statute made and provided, and we recollect very
well the time when Worcester, was a place OF
much less note than it is at present, that the
track was laid across the Common, in compliance
with the urgent wishes of the people, and at
great expense to the corporation, because it waS
believed to be great public accommodation to
have the depot adjoining that of the Boston and
Worcester Railroad, rather than upon the compa-
nys own land, South of Park street.
Our correspondent is in error in his supposi.
tion that the Common was provided by the ber-
ality of the city authorities at the expense of the
peoples pockets. The Common was gift to the
town of Worcester, from the original proprietors
and was not purchased, as he seems to suppose
His remarks about abating what he calls "com-
mon nuisance" in a summary and forcible man
ner, appear to US little too much like encourag
ing illegal violence, by unwarrantably presenting
the matter in false light There is no similari-
ty in the cases he presents. The illegal liquor
is not only wlful violation of law, but has been
declared, by law, to be a nuisance; while the pas
sage of the railroad across the Common is in &C.
cordance with law, and has had the sanction of
the people Of Worcester, in open town meeting.
We were opposed, at the time, to their crossing
the Common, but the people having assented to
it and encouraged them so to do, we think it,
now, unmsnly and unfar,to take advantage Of the
unfortunate accident which has happened, to ex-
cite prejudice against the railroad corporation
when it is conceded on all hands that they were
not in fault in the premises. If it is deemed de-
srable to have the tracks across the Common dis
continued, let it be done by fair, honorable nego-
tiation, and not by exciting prejudices and en-
couragng illegal violence. And let it not be for
gotten, that it but short time, since the peo-
pie of Worcester made great effort to bring all
the railroads centering here into one great sta-
tion house, to be located where the Boston and
Worcester station is. which would have made the
passing across the Common at least three times
as great it is now.