Omaha daily bee., 1884-10-08
n REASON WHY.

10 give the hemDlaOCe OF VeThClJy 10 L
sneaking assaults that paper intimate
that the BEE had been subsidized by cor
tractors into a support of their raids upo
the city. When promptly challenged
produce the proofs the Republican hi
not a sointilla of evidence to offer again,
tho engineer, and only seeks to pslliate il
vindictive and unmanly attitude by pre-
pounding some questions to the BEE cor
corning its courao with regard to publ
improvements. Now, we do not propos
to allow the sneaks and bushwhackers I
crawl through any loop.hole. We will
meet the issues squarely and answe
every question regarding the course 0
this paper without reserve.
We are asked why The BEE ha
"sought to defend the asphalt company
in its nefarious transactions, and whether
o Journal depending upon public support
receiving no gratuity from unpopular and
questionable sources, would voluntarily
rush to the defense II a corporation that
openly violates it's contract with the peo.
ple." The BEE 10 not aware that the
transactions of the asphalt company have
in any way been nefarious, which accord
ing to Webster means "wicked, iniqui-
tous, evil and unjust" We have never
defended the asphalt company excepting,
when, as we remember, it was assailed
by Swcesy's hand-bill for matchmaking
purposes. In that instance the streets
paved with asphalt were represented as
being almost impossible, broken up by
frost in the winter and melted by the,heat
of summer. THE BEE never did Justify
a breach of contract by anybody, least
Of all by paving contractors. We sim
ply pronounced the hue and cry of the
about the Sixteenth street
pavement as a mere tempest in q tea pot.
The contractors were under bonds to
complete their work according to the
specifications of the board of public
works, and q sufficient amount of money
had been retained to cover the cost OF
the stone blocks along the street railway
track. Hence no loss could possibly en-
to the city, and there was no occa-
sion for pounding the hew.gag and tom
tom.
The Republican wants to know why
the BEE Is insanely opposed to the use Of
Colorado sandstone and 80 theoretically
supported Sioux Falls granite and asphalt.
The BEE advocated granite as the most
desirable pavement for the principal
business streets of Omaha long before
hero was a foot of pavement laid. We
lid not caro- whether the material came
rom New Hampshire or Dakota. We
have favored asphalt except for
light traffic streets, and go far that mate.
ial seems to give satisfaction on ouch
hor~oughfares. We have opposed and
Vill continue to oppose the use Of Colo
ado sandstone for paving purposes in
omaha.
This is not ar insane opposition, but
opposition based on sound economic
principles. Sandstone may be good
nough for building purposes, sidewalks
nd curbstones, but 1t is unfit for paving. |
t will not tan the heavy
rear and tear, aud cannot even
tamped without breaking and split
ing. The intense opposition against
colorado sandstone when 1t was first in
reduced vas caused by the villainous
.ttempts to nullify the expressed wish of
he property owners in favor of other
materials. The agencies by which
colorado sandstone has been forced upon
10 on come of our streets in spite of pop
liar remonstrance are disreputable in the
We are asked why the Sioux Falls
company has advertised in the
BEE and o what use to that company
,ould such an advertisement possibly
have been.
L OF question can best be answered by
the Sioux Falls company. They doubt.
less desired to have it known far and
wide that they had g paving material
equal to any in the country, and they
naturally used the best advertising medi.
UNI west of Chicago for that purpose.
we are asked why tho BEE was so
anxious for tho issuance of bonds provid-
ing for tho expenditure by this city OF
500, 900 more for pavements, and why
tho editor of tho BEE exercise himself
personally to secure the expenditure of
$40, for this purpose2
The BEE has been o persistent and
advocate of public improve.
ments. For more than ten years it has
urged upon the city the prime Importance
of keeping pace with other cities in the
matter of public works. We fought a
battle for waterworks In Omaha against
the moss-backs five years before they
were built. We advocated pavements
and sewerage for years before they were
begun and we shall continue to urge the
Of systematic expenditures
for that class of improvements,
We have a direct interest not only in the
material growth of Omaha but in the ex.
tension of the pavement on Farnam
street. We believe that il la aaaential To