The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1870-09-05
Mr.. Decker's Reply 10 the Courier
A Complete Answer.
EVANSVILLE. September 3.

connection with the building of she
Salt Well Bridge, which does me in
justice. AS you, very kindly, refer to
my standing as a citizen, am led to
believe that you did not Intentionally
misrepresent my official conduct and
private interest in that work, and re-
spectfully ask that you insert in your
next issue the folloRing answer to
your article, in justice to me:
1st. You say: To his (Decker's)
efforts we are mainly indebted for
that expensive monument of folly, the
Salt Well bridge"
/ would state that the project for
the erection Of said bridge was started
and the petition circulated before be-
came member of the Board of Gem
missioners. The petition was first
presented to the Board in September,
1867, and at my request its construc-
ton was postponed till 1868. Not
withstandiDg the names upon the Pc
tition represented more than three
fourths of the taxable property of
Pigeon Township, l thought it q
work of too great Importance to be
entered upon without due delibera-
ton, and until an opportunity was
given taxpayers TO demonstrate If
there was any opposition to it. The
following names among others Will be
found upon the petition: VIM. H.
Walker, john ShankliD, John A.
Retz, Thos. Z. Garvin, E. Lunkin-
heifner, Morris s. johnson, John
Law. AFRO Dyer, Bernard Schapker.
Richard Raleigh, Chas DENLY, JAS. L.
Walker, Ben. Stinson, d. @. Keller,
@. Hedderich, J.W. Richardson, Jno.
Gavisk, Isaac Casselberry, G.. B.
Walker, Joseph Setchell, j. B. Mes
ker. John Miller, Thomas Kerth, M.
r.. Antilles. Joha w. Bussing, Ell. Il
B. Altering, A. G.. Sullivan, j. G..
Veneman. Henry Ayres, Henry
Feldman, Fl. Z. Blemker.l Theo-
dore Veneman, Lewis @. Stinson,
Topp & Long. E. j. Reiiz,
Alexander Wilson, John A. Haney,
q. r.. Rudd, p Maier. w. b. Menu
fee, II. Fendrick. M. j. Bray, John G.
Staser, M. o. Newman, Henry Mes
ker, VIM. Rahm & Son, N. Willard,
George Bullen, Clements Reitz, Will
liam Reitz, Henry Richardt, VIM. f.
Parrett, Frank Morris, M. Muhihaus.
en-, Ohas. Habbe. On the petition will
also be found the names of the follow
ingWeIl known citizens and tax-pay-
ers Conrad Baker, Jas. G.. Jones, A.
Gumberts, George s. Sonntag, j. NJ.
Shakellord, Fl. @. Wheeler, G.. w.
Rath bone, Jno. s. Hopkins, Wheeler
& Riggs, j. s. Jaquess, 81. D. Allis,
Il. Lewenthall & Co., AlVah John
son, William w. Morgan, G. Ca
pelle, G. Maghee. Samuel Bayard,
A. l.. Robinson, Charles Schaum, /.
& d. Holman, and lopg list of 9TH
ers, with whom will not crowd your
columns. Certainly. the request OF
such citizens and tax. payers could
hardly be rejected In a matter relating
to public improvements.
In 1868, the friends Of the
bridge insisted that the work should
be commenced, and as there was no
remonstrance or opposition from
any quarter, the County Board,
composed of Messrs. Bowers, Hawk
ius and myself unanimously ordered
that it be advertised for bids. The
bids, under the first advertisement,
were not finally accepted, and the
Sam6 OOAEOs dEdA49 Al 0GCCA1DCAs
1868, readvertised and relet the work.
These advertisements were published
in all of the daily papers. and
the progress of the proceedings
were frequently noticed In the
news columns of the papers, and
at no time was there any remon-
STRANGE presented, and not a single in
dividual appeared before the Board
or to me personally TO object to its
construction. What reason had /,
therefore, to refuse to grant the or
der asked by the petitioners?
But could not have prevented the |
building of the bridge, if l had desir-
ed to do so, as the members of the
Board were regularly elected Demo.
eracic officials, and my political oppo
nents.
End. You say ut cost the taxpayers
of Vanderburg County $50, 900 of their
money for no purpose whatever"
This is certainly a poor compliment |
you pay to the judgment of such men |
as VIM. III. Walker, John Shanklin,
Thomas Il. Garvin, John a. Reitz,
Charles DENLY, William F. Parrett,
NJ. j. Bray, Jno. Law, and the o sher Pc
titioners. These gentlemen are not ac-
customed to ask the expenditure of so |
much money for no purpose ach0t
eUer." They set forth in their petit
ton that the public convenience re-
quires that said bridge be built" and |
that the experience of the last sea-
son of high water demonstrates that /
the erection Of said bridge at as early
a day as practicable Is iRdispeas big
/ will not lengthen this commune
cation by giving the reasons (alluded |
to in the petitioD) why the bridge was
All who remember the
condition of the roads
leading to the Lower and Franklin !
Street bridges during the food of
1867, we'll know the strong reasons in
the minds of the petitioners; and its
necessity will be seen at the return of
every high flood in the Ohio River.
Bird. You say Mr.. Philip Decker
and others have bought large tract of
land over the Greek, and now that
they have the bridge built, they ex-
pect to secure the location of a road
through the same, at an enormous
pubic expense, and then lay out their
lands into town lots" &c.
On this point you have been grossly
mislnformed. 1 do not o1cn a foot of
land OUer the creek az the Ulcinity Of
the Tleeo bridge. The only land I own
ever the creek is my vineyard, situa
ted near the lower Mt. Vernon road,
reached by way Of the Lower bridge.
I had no private interests to advance
by the building of the Salt Well
Bridge. On the contrary, if I had
consulted my own property interests,
would have opposed its erection.
In conclusion, permit me to say
that if any blame is attached to- any
or parties, the RESPONSE
bilito rests with three -fourths of the
To-eh1H a1J |