The daily gazette., 1882-05-12
rHIRp sTREET BRIpaE.
Ths O0mmlttes RseeIyIng oplnIons as {

The Committee Receiving Opinions as To
the Cost Of Repatrs.
A meeting of the Bridge Committee of
the Levy Court was held at the Court House
this afternoon with all members present
except Mr.. Febiger. NI
By invitation of the committee several
builders were present TO give their ideas con-
cerning the probable coss of repairing the
draw Of the Third street bridge and advan-
tages of building o new bridge at Fourth
street. lj tEEf lI
Philip Quigley expressed the opinion that
the draw could be put in a condition to run
one year for the sum of 5000, and that he
would have parties to make that proposition
to the committee. sft sfgii
Enoch Moore, Jr., gave his opinion re-
specting the difficulty with the draw, which
was caused, he thought, by water getting. In
the opening Of the circular stone on which
the draw pivot turns and freezing there.
Some injury had probably been done by YES
sells colliding with the bridge Mr.. Moore
said he thought the bridge could be repaired
for $4 900 or $1,000 sufficiently strong to
stand for three years, barring accidents. He
was requested to prepare specifications and
agreements for the work and present them
at meeting of the committee to be held
May 23d.
Mr.. Moore also said the chords supporting
the bridge had rotted away--one on the
upper side and one on the lower side.
The p, w. & B. Roilnoad Company re-
quested the committee this morning to
defer decided action In regard 10 the change
in location of the bridge for 10 days, TO allow
them to make a proposition.
The law gives the Levy Court power to re-
move the Third street bridge TO any point
between Fifth street and Church street, in
connection with the railroad companies.
Shortly after the committee had directed
Mr.. Moore TO present his proposal, George
| G.. Lobdell, George II. Sellers and Mr.. Todd
of the Diamond State works, made their ap-
pearnnce and general informal discussion
was had upon the advantages and disad-
vantages of moving the bridge to Fourth
street.
The general opinion of the committee is
that it would be advantageous to move the
bridge to Fourth street, that thoroughfare
being wider and better for travel. The new
bridge would cross the stream almost at
right angles and while 1t was being con-
structed the old bridge could still be open
for use. Mr.. Lobdell stated that he and Mr..
Heald wanted it at Fourth street.
He had no direct interest in having the
bridge at that point any more than the fact
of being large property-holder and that
what would benefit the community most was
| advisable.
u
Mr.. Moore thought IT would be worth
$4,000 more to the county to have the
bridge at Fourth street, in the improvement
travel alone.
Mr.. Todd did not think the bridge was at
the proper location and never did. He
favored Fourth street, even while the present
site was most convenient for his business,
and were the bridge at Fourth street it would
necessitate longer haul from one of their
yards to the other.
The members of the committee stated that
there was no decided opposition TO either re-
building the old bridge or putting the new
one at Fourth street. The principal diff
Guilty was the serious obstruction to trave
were it decided to rebuild the old bridge
The Diamond State Works alone would los'
hundreds and perhaps thousands of dollar
| by the close of travel.
| 1t was fully expected to have settled tn,
| question to-day, but the railroad companie
were desirous Of more time to consider TIN
| matter.