Morning journal and courier., 1881-12-29

that the petitioners represent only $3S2 out | of SIS, 800 taxes called for on the usual 10 l mills tax. The petitioners claim that the new road will help the town-win increase it's taxable property and add to its revenues and prosperity. They cite an increase re- gently in the value of land at the Neck and land has recently been purchased there at raise of one dollar and half per foot, by Dr. Ellsworth of Hartford, Judge York of New Haven, and Colonel A. H. Robertson of New Haven. Dr. Ellsworth is noted Hart ford physician and will build there soon. and the other new purchasers will build there. Mir. Thomas R. Trowbridge, of this city, and other New Haveners have fine shore residen- ces at the Neck. One new cottage was erect ed there last fall.
 Another objection to the new road was ex- pressed thus: siIf they build this new road at an expense of SAG, 1000 we shall be de- prived of the pleasure of seeing the stylish vehicles pass our homesteads."
 The meeting yesterday was in favor of car- rying the case to the Supreme Court and of backing up the Town Agent, Mir. George Page, in opposing the new road scheme. Some of the opposition want the road and bridge built so as to benefit property in the lower part of Indian Neck. The damages and the
 benefits determined by the commissioners in regard to the new road are equal, viz, $1, 100
 in each case. The parties at the shore bene-
 fted and amounts are as follows:
 Edward wilfred. s2o Geo. AyesiIl, SIS
 ss@us caG&sse cooR assfs R$ seef
 sas sss R Tsy ns.os TT | gsn9sts H. E
 Salufa Wm. Brysn .1ao5 Jr. 15S Eli Goodrich, 100 David Lounsbury, 100 Joseph Pond, 45 Timothy Johnson, 45 and few others. The damages are to three land owners near the depot $500 each, and to Capt. Rus sell Bond $150, and Samuel Foote $50. The opposition to the bridge and the basis for their claims is amply and forcibly set forth in the resolutions passed at the meeting. which are as follows:
 Whereas Upon the application of certain taxpay- CTS and non-ts1payers, permanent and temporary Neck, to the honorable Superior Court of New Ha-
 ven county to appoint committee to hear evidence
 road m Ian and bridge W over the Brsnford river from the Shore Line railroad depot to Indian Neck and cibiy shown at the hearing before said Committee
 that the building of raid road and bridge would be heavily encountered town that it would be a very great detriment to the different industries of the l the river; that it would destroy valuable wharf
 property that it would diminish the value of eligi
 poses, besides other and varied losses and detri-
 nents that the necessity for the road not such
 that the public sentiment in the matter was forced upon the attention of the committee by many peti tions, representing nine-tenths of the taxed property in Branford that upon the evidence of competent and skilled engineers safe and perma- n6nG DE1Q86 cOuIQ De any 6ucQ au1OunI
 specified in the petition that the petitioners
 already have suitable road and bridge to the stores
 and postece schools and churches in the centre of the town that the few months in the year during which the proposed bridge would be of any was
 not sufficient to warrant the large outlay of money
 necessary to build 1t that the land to which the
 titioners request the bridge and road is church prop titioners themselves do not pay taxes sufficient to maintain the existing road and bridge besides
 many other points showing the damage such bridge
 would be to the property in the town its lack Of
 cessty the public d1sapprobaton of it and the utter
 unkelihood of it's ever making any adequate return in either money accommodation to the town and Whereas, The proposed road as laid out by the
 dred feet beside the railroad track and not than
 fifteen feet from the track being thereby much more dangerous for travelling than the in this town
 which, although than double the distance of the above mentioned road from the track, the chairman of the present committee testified under oath was
 showing unaccountable inconsistency on his part and disregard of the entire committee for law, req son and fact and
 Whereas, The aforesaid committee, disregardine
 the facts brought out in evidence reported favoraby
 the bridge and road, portion of which they have
 already laid out in manner contrary to statute reg l nations be it
 Resolved That the decision of said committee ii
 an indignity to the people of Branford and is, we consider, contrary to overwhelming evidence and public sentiment, and to which we cannot submit
 without strong protest and feeling and be it further Resolved, That we, the residents and taxpayers oi Branford, in duty bound to any and all lega
 such great and manifest injustice to the people and
 property of the town and to secure possible, tht reversing of report which we consider both erro | neous and unjust.