The Fremont weekly journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County, Ohio) 1867-1877, 1872-03-29

would be virtually aOSOrDeu Dy
new town, at the expense of the pres
ent one. As such result would not
conserve the interest of all the stock
holders, we refer to our text, as pre-
sented by General Buckland, and
ask, would the location be made with
reference to the best interest Of all
the stockholders? All the advanta-
ges expected to be derived from the
enterprise would hardly compensate
for such a result.
The other location is upon the fats
alongside of the L. E. d L. Railway,
running back to Maple street, con-
tains fourteen acres, and is offered as
donation, together with $4,000 cash
to aid in protecting the property flom
water damage. 1t is close to the bu-
siness center, and could not possibly
disturb it; is convenient to the har-
Dor, and would save nearly the entire
cost of drayage the other would re-
uuire; water is abundant, and this,
and its nearness to the fire depart
ment,would secure the cheapest rates
of insurance; adjoining the track of
the L. Z. & L. Railway, its facilities
for receiving and shipping are good
as the other. Its effects upon real
estate would be felt in every por-
ton of the city and outside its pres
ent limits, thereby beneftting all
and injuring none. Any other loca-
ton in the lower part of the city
would be equally beneficial in this
respect. 1t has this other advan-
tage, however, which is intellectually
in its favor, It would be strong ar
gument to present in favor of appro-
priations for the improvement
of our river and harbor. Our
iver needs improvement and pro
lection, and anything which will aid
in,that will add largely to its useful
ness, and assist i'll deriving the adj
vantages we ought from its POSSES
sion. Some day it may become adj
visable to establish an iron works
here, and with river easily naviga-
BILE the ores of Superior can be laid
upon our dock as cheaply as else
where, enabling our citizens to enter
into competition with the outside
world. The future of our city as
well as the present should be entitled
to consideration.
To this location, it is objected,
however, that at high water the land
overaoRs. This is an objection, GER
tainly, and if one that cannot be OBJ
waited would and should be fatal
one; or ifit is one whose recurrence,
year by year, is certain if not dan
gerous, it is entitled to its full
weight as an objection. But the
fact that it does not occur year after
year. and only occasions the works
already located there but temporary
stoppage, it strips the objection of
most OF its weight, and would rem
der it less hazardous than a loca-
tion which might be six months of
the year without water, or where the
company might be obliged force its
supply, al great cost, from the river.
Besides, we have the assertion of
one whose experience in that local
ity dates back over fourteen years,
for saying that the upper portion of
the land, sbutting upon Maple street,
and several hundred feet back, has
not been under water in all that
time. The works located at that
point, would be quite safe from any
damage by water, land the entire track
of land could be made perfectly Sc
cure against water at a trifng ex-
pense, compared to the enormous
estimates some have made.
The embankment of the L. E. & L.
Railway protect in on the south, the
river road raised to where it should
be, and which the city should do,
would efectually protect it upon the
east, while an embankment from the
river road across to the hills on the
north line of the proposed land,
would as effectually protect it from
back water, and all at a compare
lively trihing expense. Considering
the general advantages to be derived
from this location-the benefits con-
ferred upon all its stockholders
alike, the security given to the pres
ent business center, the economy in
freight and insurance, in the man
agement Of the business, which |
would point to larger dividends, and
we turn again to our text with as
surance and ask would not this To- |
cation, or some other in the lower
part of the city, be for the best
interests of all the stockholders?
As there are two sides to this |
and two parties to the is
sue, the Directors should refer it for |
deci sion to the stockholders, one |
vote for every share held, and let |
tue majority determine the matter. |
It is the only way in which it. can be
end justly determined. |
Let the majority determine it, and |
then let the result be accepted as
for the general good.
CONGRESSIONAL.