The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1876-02-22

around, begging, as usual, and was hauled
in by Officer Olsen and brought bofore
Police Magistrate Swander who ordered
his confinement in the calaboose until
train time last evening when he was re-
leased and put in the cars for Chicago.
Instead of leaving. however, he jumped
the train at Barnard & Leas' foundry and
was at once taken down by Officer Olsen
for the third time. Magistrate Swander
refused to grant any leniency this time
and sentenced him to ten days in the Gala
boose on bread and water diet. He is a
worthless vagabond and thief and utterly
unworthy the confidence or favor of any
one.
The Moline Rock River Bridge.
The bridge question appears to be at
tracing considerable attention and the ad
vantage to the city that would result in
case OF purchase is being actively discuss
ed. As many of the readers of The
ARGUS may not be familiar with the
history OF this case, few points bearing
on the matter may not be amiss at this
juncture:
The Rock river bridge was built about
10 years ago by corporate company, or,
more properly, by the citizens generally
Feeling the necessity for better facilities
for reaching the trade south of the river
and there appearing to be general feeling
in favor OF bringing the trade to Moline, a
stock company was formed and the shares
taken by all who could subscribe, in sums
from $50 up to $1,000. In this manner
the money was raised and the bridge built
at a cost of $4,000. The project soon
became involved however and after un
successfully trying to make the bridge pay
expenses, it was finally sold at forced sale
and bought in by the present owners fer
$1,000, the smaller stockholders realizing
stock being worthless.
| The present owners are: s. w. Whee
lock. Jonathan Huntoou, Judge Gould,
b. Harper, and the Gordon heirs, who
have owned and controlled the entire stock
up to the time of closing the bridge
against travel on last week "Wednesday
afternoon.
1t is stated that no dividend has ever
been declared. but it does not seem pos
sible that the present company could hayt
lost any money, as travel has been good
and large number of teams have crossed
the bridge, both ways, and as the ex
Ipenses attendant upon keeping tn,
structure in repair have been very little
it does not appear plain how any pecuniar'
loss could have resulted, and now whel
the owners find fhe bridge needing som
outlay. they tire # the burden aud want t
foist 1t on the city rather than risk any
thing themselves. They ask, for the pier
and appurtenances, the sum of $3.50
which is $500 more tian they paid for
years ago, aud they expect the city to fal
: in line aud accept the offer.
| The city should do no such thing, al
; it is to be hoped that the council wi
, weigh this subject before acting upon th
proposition. The owners ciaim that th
piers are worth alone double the pric
asked; tha: their original cost was SIG, O0t
and that the builder, George Evener, s
, certifes. etc. Admitting this to be true
does not follow that the city should be con
| PEELED to saddle an increase of debt to a,
: commodate few. disgusted stockholdel
who lack the enterprise tt huild themselv,
: or to uenture any outlay, bat are perfect
? ,cilling that the city should In oths
words their owners feel that the bridge
/ an elephant on their hands. as it no
stands, aud knowing the utter impossibill
{ of getting any of our moneyed men tn We
e ture in an enterprise which does not prou
e Use immediate results, they appeal to Il
/ city and hope to hoodwink the council in
e accepting their proposition: but they don
q appear willing to make any very gre
sacrifice themselves. They want S.,
d more than they are paid for it. and reck'
# the receipts as nothing.
| i -
4 commercial way, are, OF course, worth CO
q sidering and should have some weight
q the matter, but inasmuch as the city
,e already in debt beyond its ability to ra
the consummation of the Rock river brid
scheme is unworthy Of moments consi
~ GRAFTON by the council.
- Another reason why the present owne
!" ought to rebuild. or at least rep'
!. the bridge. is because some of t
- stockholders own property adjacent
~ the bridge, which. if the structure rem;
e closed, would materially depreciate
e value.
III This case is only paralelled, howev
with any other project where Lublic en
re and private interest ceme in antagonist
al the latter is always paramount. Ii, as I
or owners claim, the piers are worth
n, thev originally C. st, aud the cost of bui
ld ing new frame work only few tho
III ands; if the travel is, as has been rep
be scented. why not rebuild themselvt
lr, Why ak the city to do wi
ry they lack the spirit to do indiy
ry ually2 Why should the city be called
q. t., aid in the enhancement of pravate pr
IA ertu at the expense Of the community
general?
y, The matter is one requiring more Il
,rt passing nntice and calls for careful c
on sideration by the council Hasty Iegi
ice tion will prove disastrous to city ntere
nie Careful examination of the subject is
ter only solution. The matter rests with
,nt council, and the action of thai body will
rs- watched with more than ordinary inter
lad -.
hit The best is nearly always the cheap
,er The use of dry earth as eisinfect
as would soon become universal if 20 OF
ed commoda were 10 existence besides
"a, Wakefield To the sanitary and salui
,lso details of the old Levifical law the j.
IRIS Of all times have owed their health
lis longevity. The principle taught in D.
the xiii. II. l3. is best applied by
ha, Wakefield Earth Closet Co of SO
OF Street New York.
i: +: +: 3 : 81 a. 8 I; /;