The Lambertville record. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1872-1968, 1882-07-05
INExPLICABLE.


Mr.. EDIToR:-Y Your complimentary re-
marks in last weeks issue, Of the doings
of the freeholders at the iron bridge on
South Union ST., is not a little CALLING to
the property holders on Swan and Union
sts., who are smarting under what they
feel to be an utter disregard for their in
terests and wishes. After the bridge had
been accepted for fifteen years and the
abutments kept in repair, for the free
holders to step in at this late day, without
solicitation or consulting the Common
Council, and against the remonstrances of
the property holders who are injured
thereby, and build huge unsightly stone
wall forty-five feet lcng, covering the
whole front of the adjoining lot, without
consulting the owner, filling she street up
to grade, a thing which those who gave the
grade never contemplated would be done,
is inexplicable. While the houses on the
street are located as az present they knew
that to fill the street to grade would in
jure the properties and subject the city to
damages. Building sewer across Union
street forty-eight feet long, two feet four
inches wide, aud twenty inches deep,
large enough for mill race, to carry
water that might have been taken across
Swan street about twenty feet on the
surface, the same as at the southeast
corner of Union and Bridge streets !;
piling up dirt and stones in front of VIM.
Ramsey's property and others, making
his place of business inaccessible for horse
and wagon making an abrupt and dan
gerous offset of two feet on east Swan
street and on the west side cutting off the
property holders from all access to their
lots by an abrupt embankment three feet
high also depriving the city and others
from all the advantages of gravel for
filling purposes which collects at the
mouth of the culvert moreover, depriv-
ing twenty families of the advantages of
water from the creek-all this at the ex-
pense of the county of probably thou
sand dollars. IT all the people of the
First Ward had petitioned the Street
Committee to fill this particular place in
the street up to grade and spend this
amount of money, they would have said
no, for the best of reasons, that it was
uncalled for and unnecessary they would
have said the street had been SO for fifteen
years and there had been no complaints,
but when done at the county's expense
it is thought by some of the most acute
legal minds of the city to be necessary
and good job.
Now what we did ask was that the
bridge be lowered two feet, which would
have been one foot higher than 1t origin
ally was, and two feet higher from the
bed of the creek than the bridge ON Main
street, which could have been done for
one hundred dollars and the properties
benefited hundreds of dollars where they
are now injured hundreds, and the street
an easier grade for teams. The property
holders were willing and offered to bear
the expense. The First Ward freebooter
was willing, but the Second Ward free
holder objected on the ground of expense,
as the freeholders were trying to econo
mize this year. Another reason was the
calling the Board of Freeholders together
to get their consent, which he knew was
not necessary unless the expense would be
moro than five hundred dollars, trans
action inexplicable ouly as explained by
the remarks of those passing by and from
some of the freeholders, who examined it,
that it is done to give work-a reward
for services rendered-in plain words,
spending the county's money for election
eering purposes and to buy votes.
In conclusion we say all honor to the
Third Ward freeholder for his bold and
manly stand in defence of the rights OF
the property holders and against this
shameful expenditure of the county
money. ISAAC w. CLEyENaER.