The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1869-12-25
Division Of Wes,bsoes.

10 Me Edat0f OF Ue fTeSS:
We see in your paper of this morning the
remonstrance of some of the citizens OF west
brook living within what will be the old town,
against the creation of the proposed new
town. AS this remonstrance contains the sub
stance of their opposition to the measure ana
ia of course as strongly put as the nature OF
the case will admit we can now see precise
ly what they claim as the just cause OF their
opposition. And first they say the east
ern section (the new town. contains all
the wealthiest and most populous portion of
the town. Admit this to be true and it does
not follow that the town Is not large enough
for two towns OF course after division Meth
er of the towns will be as wealthy or populous
as the old. Oh, no, we do not conclude that a
part is equal to the whole But we say that
the old town will be still among the wealth.
est towns in the State, having valuation of
eleven hundred thousand dollars. In 1850,
the last State valuation, there were but twen-
ty cities and towns in the State which had a
valuation of million dollars. So that old
Nestbrook would still be IN the front rank of
wealthy towns in the State,
Second-They say we shall have call the
gravel beds for the highways"
If this were true in the important sense OBJ
viously indicated, this second best reason
would have little force. But when it is
known that only one of the town gravel-beds
is near enough to their territory to be pract-
cally available to them, whether there is a
by them after the division as now, his sec
ond great objection seems to vanish entirely.
Third.-They say we shall have the tOwnhOuse
recently purchased and fitted up. For that we
are willing to pay to the uttermoSt farthing.
Certainly this cannot be one of the objects "to
whose traditions for more than half century
they are ardently devoted"-so that money
cannot be an equivalent, for it (the town
housed is nothing more nor less than an old
UniverSalist meeting house repaired and re-
painted. The Legislature, allow us to suggest
to them, has it in its power to protect the rem :.
meeting house. This suggestion it seem to
US ought to pacify them SO far as their third
reason is concerned.
Now as to the fourth. 1t is true that we
have valuable town farm. We chose COM
mttee to negotiate with them in relation to
this, and they declined to negotiate. OF course
they prefer by this to leave it to the wisdom
of the Legislature to determine who shall
lease this farm and what sum the other party
shall pay for it. Very WELL we are satisfied to
leave it to the Legislature We must do so
after all our negotiations, which would amount
to nothing until ratified by that tribunal.
Fifth, as to the bridges. We expect the Leg
islature will do justice to both towns in re-
spect to the bridges. We have not asked, and
do not intend to ask the Legislature to give us
any advantage in relation to any of the town
property rights or privileges. We simply ask
for charter making us new town, and we
assign for reasons that the present town is too
large in every respect. We believe this to be
true. 1t has outgrown its old charter. A
manufacturing community has advanced to
the magnitude of an important town, on the
one side, and series of suburban villages has
sprung up on the other The latter desire to
set up for themselves and ask for town char
ter. Do the remonstrants assign one valid
reason why they should not have it?
BEAUMONT.