Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1872-03-06
Letter from the Hill.
To the Watertown Repubhcan

To the Watertoacn Republican
In your notice OF the case Of the City
against Richards, see you mistook the
/ question. Was it street? was the ques-
ton. This, of itself, is not worth speaking
/ about but statement of the facts might
do good-possibly much good. Had 1
| known of the doctrine that governed the
case, we should have saved one lawsuit,
sure, much trouble and expense, and any
amount OF hard feeling
The verdict was, that it was street.
And why? Because people had been allow
ed to travel there. The Court said to the
Jury, that short time would make it
street, by Dedication The Court decided
the case. Don't ask me the use Of Jury.
This doctrine every man ought to know,
that they may be on their guard. If the
ten year law don't catch them, thl S will.
The first a man knows, the trap is sprung,
and likely by the very one he has been will
ling to accommodate. 1t is safe to say that
80, and probably 80 per cent. of the people,
are ignorant of these traps.
Is the victory in this case anything to
boast of, let me ask F? The fact that it has
cost me 800, or more, is matter of graft
fcation to some, no doubt, but that is a
side affair. And the verdict, let us think of
that moment. Let Us suppose the ques-
ton came up en- its merits; who would have
pronounced that verdict l for one won't
believe that twelve men can be found in
this town, or state, that W ould, nor woulq
the jury, could they have decided according
to their own views of right. Then why the
doctrine? For knaves At least that is
the view that all have of it, that have
spoken with on the subject since this suit
was commenced, and | have spoken with
many. All, call it unjust, unreasonable,
and even dangerous, morally speaking, for
the reason that on is not safe in being even
decent man, if he wishes TO be. Could
find a man who would subscribe to such
doctrine, l should most cordially invite him
to keep away from my ben roost.
There is way marked out in some of the
forefathers for establishing roads, that looks
humane; that is, survey. record, pay, and
divide up the expense of fencing. That
looks like doing, as one would like to be
done by, but this other doctrine, a savage
would despise-the Red Man, would regard
it as beneath the dignity Of contempt. Who
gave the courts authority to establish it ?
The people? Never They never gave the
right to any man, to make present to A,
at the expense of B.
The idea Look at it, make diagram OF
it, and examine it. The idea, that it must
be inferred, that man has given away,
made an eternal donation to the public OF
the right of way, because he has allowed
his land, it being an accommodation to them,
and no present Inconvenience to him, few |
years, or months, or even days,
Look at it. Let us all sit down and look |
at it. Let the press examine, and grow big |
ger by showing up the subject in its true
light. 1t would do the country a good ser
vice, and itself an extra honor. 1t is no
trifiing matter--the case in question may be
the subject itself is not. The Consttu-
ton says one thing, and the Courts another,
and the unsuspecting people are shared, le-
gally trapped, and that in this Christian
age and country.
RTcIIApOs IN