West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1890-01-23
THE SITUATION
In Regard TO the County Bridge at
ROWlesburg.

The people Of Rowlesburg and
vicinity have enlisted for the war
and are determined to have a county
bridge across "The Windi ng River
Cheat" at that place. This is al
right, let the good work go on.
We know they need n bridge and
believe they ought TO have one, but
let us go a little slow about this,
and consider the matter fully. 1t
may be urged that we hoUe been slow
about this, and hare considered the
matter fully, but it is best to first
study out II work, and then work
out II study. 1t is true the people
there have been asking for this
bridge for n long time and they
might have had ii ere this, if the
county had not been subjected to
enormous and unexpected damages
by winds and floods, TO bridges and
roads in various parts Of the county.
Bridging Cheat at Albrightsyille
has cost the county, in round num-
bers, about $50, 900. This amount
Of money ought to have kept "a good
bridge there and built one at
Rowlesburg and Dunkard Bottom
also, for it has built three bridges
there and spent IS, 600 repairing
this last one, but these reverscs
were unexpected, and Of course
retarded the prospect for u bridgea ut
Rowlcsburg. The good people Of
the River City are very indignant at
the recent action Of the County
Court, in refusing to take hold Of
the matter at this last term, but
they must be reasonable, and give
the court Il chance. The court did
not refuse to take up the matter
but as it was a subject for careful
consideration, they asked for time
to investigate and look around Il
little so simply postponed the mat
ter till the next term, when it is
probable they will take some def
inlte action in the premises. The
court was willing this time to sub
800
NIT the matter to Il vote of the pco-
pie, as this would relieve them of
the responsibility, but the Rowles-
burgers would not accept this, well
knowing that it would be voted
down, for Grant, Pleasant, Valley
and Lyon districts would vote solidly
against it, and enough III the other
districts to defeat the measure by II
big majority. But this is taking Il
selfish view OF the matter. for those
people to vote against it, just be-
aus it would be Of no benefit to
them directly, never stopping to
think that all public improvements
tends directly or indirectly to the
general good and the material ad-
vancement Of the county. But
nevertheless, it is safe to say the
county at large would never vote for
it, and the bridge will have to be
built by the authority of the county
court, or by a joint stock company,
and they (the Rowlesburgers) say
they will have a bridge il they have
to build it this latter way. They
claim they only asked the court to
appoint an estimating committee,
which the court was willing to do,
only it wanted to name the men
instead of which the Rowlcsburg
committee had them already picked
out, and wanted to appoint the
estimating committee themselves
and of curse wanted to appoint
Interested parties, while the court
wanted to appoint d~isintercsted
parties, so here they split and moth
ing was done. Since they were
determined to appoint the cstimat-
ting committee themselves. and be
responsible for all expenses. they
should have done it in their mass
meeting, or else allowed the court
to appoint its own committee.
As the county court has been
severely criticised for their monaco
ton in the matter, we have thought
best to present the whole matter
fairly to the public. 1t must be
remembered that the present county
court system is an experiment. and
we believe q successful one, and the
members themselves are particularly
anxious TO make it % success, and
avoid any blundcr that will bring