The Findlay Jeffersonian. [volume] (Findlay, Hancock County, Ohio) 1870-1881, 1876-03-24
Ed. JEFF. In all my former articles

which you have been kind enough to
publish, have said nothing against any
fair and judicious project for the i'm
provement Of our highways. In fact, l
feel very much in favor of such improve
ment. ANY plan that is just to all, OF a
large majority, will meet my unqualified
appreciation. Our roads ought to be i'm
proved-perhaps macadamized. The
roads of Findlay township are N ot what
they ought to be, and some of our citi-
zens are looking to some plan for their
improvement. The plan proposed is a
levy of tax authority first having been
obtained for that purposeI upon all the
taxable property of Findlay township.
The Corporation of Findlay is a part, but
not all, of Findlay township, and pos
sesses certain powers that are incident to
all like corporations in the State. The
| Corporation may compel the lot owners
| on any street, to macadamize the same
| at their own expense. This has been
| done in the more densely settled parts of
| our town. / believe that all of Main
street from the river to Hardin street,
all of Sandusky, Hardin and Lincoln
streets, are macadamized, and all at the
expense of the lot owners. Tie same
is equally true of Crawford, Washing
ton and Main Cross, from Main street to
the Railroad. Main street, south of
Hardin, and Main Cross street west of
the Railroad, ARE but partially, if at all,
macadamized.
These and other macadamized portions
OF our streets, are in we'll settled portions
of our town, and the lot owners are
among our wealthy citizens. Will they
be required to macadaInize the streets
along their premises or will that burden
be cast upon the people of the town.
ship? If those owning lots on streets
that are macadamized, were compelled
to pay the expense of macadamizing
them, why should not all other streets
within the Corporation be improved in
the same manner If all within the
Corporation were thus improved, the
burdens of improving the other roads of
the township would be very much reduc-
ed. Has our Council power to compel
the macadamizing of all the streets with
in the Corporationl If they have, and
a general system of improvement is to
be sinaugurated, why should they not
avail themselves of this power at least
to the extent of improving the main
roads within our corporation9 A, on
Sandusky street, has been compelled to
make q macadamized road along his
premises. Why should not B., who owns
lots on South Main, or West Main Cross
Street, be compelled to do the same. If
one part of our town is compelled to
macadamize its streets, why should not
another part be compelled to do the
sames
One word as to the cost of macadam-
ing our roads. The stone delivered on
Main Cross street last summer cost nine
ty cents per perch. A maeadamized
road eight feet wide and one foot thick
of stone, would require 2560 perch of
stone, at 50. 3G4 per mile. If ten feet
wide 5000 perch at S2SS0- Iftweive feet
wide 3S4O at S3456. This will be the cost
of stone alone. To this must be added
the cost of drainage, preparing the road
bed, and other incidental expenses.
In making the above, / have only de-
sired to present facts for consideration
that may, in some measure, assist US in !
judging of the practicability of the meas
ure now under consideration.
Since writing the above, have MOTTO
ed in your paper another article. upon |
the subject of macadamized roads. sign |
ed G. w. P. He is an old and recog-
nlzed opponent fn this controversy. He
still persists in advocating. notwithstand-
ing all of my efforts to convince him to
the contrary, that all should be taxed
alike for the especial benefit of few.
That he is honest in his opinion, no one
has expressed doubt. That his opin-
on is to large extent influenced by
locality, it is quite rsasone bic to infer.
[f he labors, as / think he does, under a
1elusion, let him enjoy it. Itmay prove
A source of happiness to him in his prime
No one should ruthlessly deprive him of
t. His opinion is, to him, a sacred thing,
md no matter upon what it is predica
ed, entitled to some degree of consid
,ration. Believing that the public is
already tired with this rrprcr able dis
,ussion, / propose 10 leave it, So lar as
j. w. P. is concerned. and liim to the
olace of his own private opinions. and
he qualification Of having done mnch
or the benefit of the people of Han
;ock county.
Now, one word in reference to myself.
am not oblivious to public opinion. 1t
5 not, however, to h,e an infallible guide,
md, though may respect, cannot
.lways adopt it. i must be governed by
ny own convictions of right and wrong;
nd all the witty or witless jests and low
ings at me, from sources of doubtful
urity, will never, / trust, drive me
rom my position. have never catered
o popularity. have meyer expected land,
never deserved it MCre than
alf of my life has been spent in Find
ny. More than half of my family are
'uried there, and only await the allot-
ed hour to be united with them in the
anne cemetery. 1t lily becomes any one,
resenting himself os a type of perfec
ion, to foolish and frivolous charges
gainst me. In my own judgment /
ave never said or done a thing that
ill initiate against the true interests of
'in6lay or any of its inhabitants Ihave
that their interests and mine
Tere, in large measure, identified.
E. BRoyE.
A SUIT was commenced last Friday in ,
he United States Circuit Court, for the
outhern District of Ohio against por-
on of the heirs of Hon. DUNCAN NEAR
HUR, one of Ohio's earliest Governors