The Bossier banner. [volume] (Bellevue, Bossier Parish, La.) 1859-1952, 1866-07-28
Correspondence.

of the Banner over the signature OF
"Tax- Payer" In doing SO, ] shall at
tempt nothing more than simple
statement of the facts of the case, and
leave the matter to those who desire to
participate in such controversies.
1t is true that I leased the bridge
across Cross Bayou. and the ferry
across Red Chute; being the last and
highest bidder, and not responsible for
the absence of Mr.. j. w. Mcdonald,
or any other persons, who might wish
to bid. The bridge was the property
of the parish, and they had right to
lease it and / had right to bid. BY
the terms of the lease, gave bond for
the keeping of the bridge in good re-
pair for the benefit of the travelling
public, as well as for the payment of
amount of the lease. The bridge was
swept away by the river. Whose bu-
siness was it to rebuild itl Suppose
Mr.. TAX Payer" should say it was
mine. Suppose had built it, would
not the Police Jury have been COM
PEELED to deduct the value of the new
bridge from my bond before they could
have obtained judgment against me
and before they could have leased the
new bridge for another year? Does
Mr.. Taxpayer" believe that the
Police Jury would not be compelled to
pay for its being built! But it was
not my business to rebuild it. The
bridge was the property of the parish,
and its destruction was their loss, and
not mine. Having to rebuild it, it was
their duty to see that it was done al
once. They proposed that upon the
completion of and acception by them
of new bridge. to be built upon q
new plan furnished by them, they would
cancel my bond.
The bridge and ferry together rent,
ing for l$I500) fifteen hundred dollars
the amount paid for the building of tbs
new bridge would be about equal tt
two years rent of the bridge alone
And yet, if am not mistaken. formei
Police Jurors obtained the building o.
q bridge by giving therefor ten years
lease of the same. But Mr.. "Tax
Payer" with wonderful sagacity, has
discovered that the Police Jury i
squandering the peoples money! Tha
the Police Jury, by building a bridg
that should have been built three year
since, and over which no one has passe,
with safety in that time, and fron
which more than one man and hors
have been precipitated, had betraye'
the trust reposed in them
And, with wonderful astuteness, h
!: has further discovered that all othe
lessees of ferries and bridges should b
released from the payment of the sam
because, by the action of the Polio
Jury, | was required to build bridg
that was indispensable to the commu
nifty, instead of paying in money tn
: amount of my bond. Did the parisl
, lease these other lessees bridges an
ferry boats in their contract, and hav
the same beenfdestroyed by circun
stances beyond the control of the les
see 7 If so, the parish is bound to re
; place the bridge or ferry boat, or re
lieve them of the payment of the bono
7 In all such cases my opinion would b,
!. if allowed to express one, that ii
b bridges and boats should be immediat,
= ly replaced by the parish, and NJ
!. Taxpayer" taxed again to meet ii
expense incurred But in the cas-,
alluded to, did the losses acquire MOI
f than the right to collect toll at certai
$ points, themselves to furnish the NEAR
n of transportation across the stream
: IF not, their cases and that Of Gro:
i Bayou bridge being wholly dissimila
o the measure of relief should be who'll
d different.
But. Mr.. Editor, who are the polio
Jury against whom such grave charg
are so wantonly brought by STA,
, Payer 7" Are they men wanting
experience and willing by their acts
! plunge the parish into embarrassment
from which it cannot be extricated O.
eept by the oppressive taxation of Il
l. people? Does their past history ia
: tify such an idea for moment as r
y CARDS any one member of that body
, Are there not men in that body wi
have for years and years managed Il
affairs of the uaPish with eeonomy al