Sacramento daily record-union., 1889-09-05
THAT TROUBLESOME ROAD .
Mrs. Valensin Makes "a Statement of Hel
Side Of fhe Ease

Side of the Case.
In mentioning the fact, day or two
sine, that Judge Armstrong had cited the
Board of Supervisors 10 certify TO the Su-
perior Court all proceedings had in relation
to the change in the road through Mrs.
Valensin's property nesr Hicksyille, the
RECORD UNION made a brief reference to
the points at issue between Mrs. Valensin
and the county. The matter had been so
of,en explained in the proceedings of the
Board of Supervisors, that no effort was
made to 60 into the full details. Mrs
Valensin, however, seems 10 think that
recital of full history of the controversy
is necessary in order TO set herself properly
before the public, and sends the RECORD
UNION the following communication on the
subject
EDS. RECORD UNION In your issue of
this morning there appears an article under
the above heading. As cannot entertain
the thought that you would willingly wish
to lnJure me in the eyes of my fellow-citi
zens, trust that you will insert this COM
munication over my signature.
L. 1t is untrue that was desirous of
closing the road and opening another to
run direct" etc. Application was first
made to me by several Of the residents of
this district in and after May, 1883, to con-
sent to such change. After much consid-
Grafton l did agree to the proposed altera-
ton OF the roads so far as | had right to
do.
2. Thirty-three freeholders possessing all
the lands except one hundred and twenty
three acres in this road district, thereupon
petitioned the Board of Supervisors for the
construction of the new road for the dis
continuance of the old road; and for Civ
ing me the old road as consideration or
payment for the land on which the new
was to be made. The Supervisors gave six
weeks of careful inquiry to the matter;
came and personally inspected the pro-
posed route, and then did, by unanimous
vote grant the petition op the 18Th of No
Vember, 1888.
3. On May 9th of this year the Board
OF Supervisors accepted from me deed for
the new road. Neither then nor since
has the Board of Supervisors fulfilled its
part OF the contract by putting me in
possession of the agreed consideration.
though the new road has been, from
May 9th, opened and used by the public.
On the contrary, the Board of Supervisors
has ever since tried to deprive me of this
consideration. You describe this as "a
great deal of contention between Mrs.
Alice NJ. Valensin. the Supervisors and the
inhabitants of Hicksville" If to claim
ones right is contention then your descrip-
ton may be accepted.
4. 1t is untrue that there was a strong
remonstrance sent up against the proposed
change." The only opposition came from
one treeholder, the owner of three acres
IN this road district All the rest of the
freehoiders, thirty-three in number. had
petitioned for the alterations. To this op
ponent, as well as to the other two who
have since joined him, that part of the old
road joining the new, giving access to and
from their lard and residences, was to re.
main unsltered as public highway.
o. The prayer of the protestirg G citizens" ;"
granted unanimously by the Board of
Supervisors August 5th, is or ought to be
found in the remonstrance of Kruger and
others filed July 1t. That is two months
after the new road had en- thrown open
to the public, and after the Supervisors had
accepted my deed. His, signed by seven
teen persons in all, of whom OILY six are
freeholders in this road district OF these
SIX, four signed the original petition ask
ing for the alterations the fifth was rot
then in this road district. and the sixth is
the same individual who alone opposed the
alterations of the roads. So then the
Board OF Supervisors nine months after
according the petition of thirty-three
citizens against one opposing, rescinds its
previous decision by granting virtually
the petition OF one citizen against twenty
nine. The four who signed both petitions
cannot of course be counted.
The real cause of all this hub
bub, which Jour euphemistically call
contention, is well known. Two of the
individuals who subscribed both petitions
were unable when the time came to carry
out business engagements made with me.
one OF the Supervisors has been pleased, to
spouse their cause, to drag this private
matter into the public question, and to
move that prayer which he seems to find
IN the remonstrance of July 1st be granted.
This same gentleman assured me the old
road would be closed at once if | would allow
TINS broken private engagement to be re-
made and carried out.
Whether the Board of Supervisors has a
right to dispossess me of the consideration
Tor which l gave the land; whether the
Board has right three months after open-
ing the new road to prevent me fencing in
and taking possession of the old road;
whether the Board has the right 10 ignore
or revoke the prayer of thirty-three of the
most substantial freeholders of this road
district and turn the remonstrance of six
others VIRTUALLY Only one, as shown aboyel
into prayer and then grant it, are ques.
lions now Sub JUDGE on which it would be
lndellcate, il not presumptious, to express
opinion publicly. | only wish to spare
myself from urjust prejudice. This do, |
trust, by strictly limiting myself to facts
thai can be well attested or that are stated
in the documents filed in the office of the
Board OF Supervisors. Very respectfully,
ALICE NJ. VALENsIN.
Il