Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1875-01-29
TrE CAVE DINK.RO1D 1gATN

TUT Dtnk TOaU Dut as WISH 10 ucIcnu my
self against personal attacks l will again
ask the privilege oil being heard through
yoHr columns, The public have taken too
much interest in the bank road and bet
ter way from the west into the village and
tothe depot 10 forget facts MS they have been
developed since tho subject has been ngi-
tatcd, hence I will not repeat much Of the
evidence. Yet before reviewing the article
in your paper OF the 22d, written by Ellie
Charler OF New York, will refer to one
or two facts which oniltcd in my former
article. When the suhjec, of The Cave bank
road was brought before the first board OF
commissioners in Nav. 1873 ii was shown
that the public required better road into
tho village, and it was admitted before the
commissioners by both parties that some
thing should he done TO bring about an i'm
provement in the grade. As evidence Of
tho fact will refer 10 the proposition made
by Mr.. Charlier through one of his lawyers
(Mr. Field) TO bring what is known as the
Hadley hill to A degrees at his OWE OK
pcnse. The proposition has since boeu
Withdrawn. The High street hill was en-
amined 10y the commissioners and evil
dence was brought to show that the hill
could be graded L. ~ degrees at trlning
expense notwithstanding the numerous
water and gas pipes that were within four
feet Of the surface. The Green street hill
by the old Baptist corner was also closely
examined, but met with less favor. The
commissioners gave some attention to the
Brook road. Tho result Of the hearing was
this: The commissioners deferred their re-
port upon the Bank road, saving they
wished TO wait and see what the town
would do about repairing and grading the
other roads. The March following the
town voted one thousand dollars TO repair
tho Brook road. But before the repairs
were made a petition 10 Tho court was
drawn up and circulated asking for inn
provement on the road from the foot OF
Main street via Fiat street and the Brook
road 10 West Brattleboro, and thence 10
Marlboro, As soon as it was known that
such petition WAS in circulation the old
petitioners for the Bank road drew up q
new petition, and in short time obtained
nearly 40 names. The result was a new
board. Their decision has already Leen
referred TO. Although the town expended
$1,000 more upon The Brook road than was
first appropriated, the evidence of team
sters and the travelling public was decided
~ against the Brook road for through trav-
ell and heavy teaming, as il was much fur
Their and must always he very crooked.
High street hills remain ~ they were and
will he likely 10 until minority Of cti-
zens press the improvement. oar course
has been from the earliest moment Of the
effort 10 bring out facts for the benefit of
those interested in the improN emeni, and
the importance and magnitude Of the case
has risen in accordance with these facts.
Iu writing my previous article made no
personal attacks; 1 simply claimed that
the petitioners should have what they ask
cd Tor notwithstanding private individuals
claimed especial rights and wished to be
let alone. The attack made upon me by
Mr.. Charlier has very little TO do with the
road case before an enlightened public who
will understand the facts. The people who
advocate the road are not all fools or knaves
even IL an article of balderdash in a news
paper counts them as such. The writer of
the article referred 10 pretends to make a
review of my review which so much dis
turbed him. The criticism shows the same
spirit he uttered before the commissioners
ana before the people of The town, and is
too well remembered 10 need repeating.
His violent attack on me and the Oft re-
peated use OF nay name has brought me in
to more notorieiy than | could reasonably
expect. He does not seem to understand
how new roads and improvements are us
Hally obtaints. If he did he would not ac-
cuse one citizen Of SO much misdemcanor,
and claim that minority had no right to
ask for public Improvement because il
might take in IA remote corner Of his pas
ture. lie does not attempt to show that the
road would not accommodate a large num-
Der of people or that the 40 petitioners
wore men of unsound mind wishing only
10 injurc some private individual, losing
sight entirely Of the road. His only effort
seems to be 10 make the whole subicct.a
personal matter. This is his old tune play
ed over again. The cause of this il per
fectly apparent. 1t was simply because |
dared to stand up and defend the right re-
gardless Of birth, wealth, or position. Who
that has any eye open cannot see the kind
OF spirit shown from the beginning. Who
does not know that the rights and needs of
a large number of the work ing classes have
been entirely disregarded. My reviewer
had right TO testify and argue his case as
he pleased. He had right to attack me
personally II he chose; and l have the
same right to say that the sentiments he
has expressed are what the people so much
dread. 1t is a kind Of monarchy which
docs not flourish in country towns, as ii
endangers the right of the people and our
republican institutions. Yet this power is
looked up to. il is natcrcd and worship.
ped. The one man power has east n with
ering blight upon the cid world and Is be-
ginning TO be felt here not only in our
halls of Legislation, but in cities and towns.
The reviewer goes on 10 show that the two
years controversy has proved that the road
was not needed. The hundreds who ask
for the road do not say so, hence it is still
unsettled. Mr.. Charlier claims that before
purchasing the property he conferred with
certain individuals about the road and be-
came satisfied that ii would never be built.
l would ask hew mad a half dozen disin-
terested persons knew about the wants aud
needs Of those who were asking for bet
ter grade into the village? Here again the
zone man power" shows itself. Tho Pro-
lessor attempts to show that The road could
not be permanently built without endan.
gering the ''old road" and the 'aqueduct.'
What are the iactsY Did not Mr.. Perry,
practical road builder, give bsad backed
by responsible men to build the rond with
out injuTing the old road or water pipes?
aud did not the commissioners openly ad-
nit that the bond disposed of that part of
the case? If ii had been necessary we
would have given a $50, 900 bond to build a
good and substantial road. Mr.. c. spreads
out before the public large number of
good names TO back up his opinion. Is
their testimony of more value than the
testimony OF the petitioners who know US
much about the road as those gentlemen
who were opposing it2 The public can
Judge for itself Among the names he
brought ont so prominently / notice 5. NJ.
Waite who was opposed TO the road but
did testify that II the road was built he
could devise a way to cross the walerpipes
without injury, and he has since made the
same statement to me. / could make a
1iSDlaV of n largo number of names rhO
but consider il quite "too thin" 10 publish
lhem. 1t is not difficult matter to get
names for either side OF road ease, Our