The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1874-10-24

To the Editor OF the Dallas Herald
The idea of II free bridge across the
river Mt Dallas is preposterous.
The only way to accomplish such q
thing would be to purchase thepresent
bridge. This could not be done at any
! reasonable figures. IL Is worth, to the
stockholders, ut least twice as much as
it cost to build it. 1t Is exceedingly
profitable stock, and if they sell they
the county or the city? In either case,
1t would result In taxes upon the far
mers.
Make it free and who would keep 1t
in repair? 1t could only be done by
taxation, which the farmers must ulti-
mately pay.
Let the bridge alone; it is exactly in
the light hands, and the right place.
1t is not the first bridge that has SPAN
ned Il river and led to Il city. They are
common in all countries, and the peo-
pie pay the toll without grumbling.
Perhaps there are some hardships in
this case and some rigid rules that are
not usual. 1t is usual tor men possessing
such exclusive privileges to deal very
Literally with those in whose immedi-
ate path it lies, especially if it is profit
able. 1t is thought by some that the
privileges and profits of this company
should warrant it in making the pas
sage free to the citizens of the south
side of the river. There is no justice
in this demand. tits great relief to get
over the bottom and river on the levee
and bridge, and no one in whose reach
they be, should be dissatisfied with any
reasonable rate of toll. But to this
class is due liberality that should free
them, as far us possible, from all
trouble and embarrassment. With
those who are compelled to pass daily
or regularly it would seem that some
arrangement might be made us to price
and time that would be agreeable.
1t is regarded as great hardship by
those who wish to go to church that
they have to pay toll.
But there are some who reside en-
tirely out of the range of the bridge
who are compelled to cross on it to get
to the city, by reasons of the restrictions
upon crossing the river at other points.
Those people live several miles east of
south from the city, and the terminus of
the line is about one mile due west of
the court house, and to compel those
people to make that extraordinary Cir
cult, and pay toll toget to the city, is
great grievance, and justly SO.
D Those people never visit the city
when they can AVOID il, and only for
want of q direct route-not at all on ac-
count of the toll at the bridge. The
city utterly refuses to open II gate to
the south, and the county court wont
open road down the river, so that
those living over the river below the
city suffer many privations rather than
go round by the bridge.
The road by Millers ferry is circuit
road down the river at high water
the bottom would be on excellent
been an intention on the part of the
bridge, and they will neither go to the
city or ask road. =.
All this bad feeling between the peo-
pie OH the south side of the river and
the city and bridge company should be
healed. The county or city buying the
bridge and making it free, or paying
the toll by taxation, will not do it. 1t
will make it worse. Do justice to all;
act literally by those who are lmme-
diately affected. Let the bridge re-
main as it is. II Is not the toll that
offends. The bridge Is II great conven-
ience, und very creditable to the city,
county, and especially to those who
built it, Act generously toward those
who reside in II direct line with it--in
whose paths it has been built. Court
patronage do not try to force it, and
all will be right.