Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-05-06
CLOSING THE GATES.
Residents of Amsdor Denied an OPP,
Road to This City.


Residents of Amador Denied an Open
Road to This City.
For some years past the residents of the
north western part of Amador county, who
find it to their interest to trade direct with
this city, have been greatly Inconvenience
by what they claim to be the selfishness Of
few people ia the vicinity of Michigan
Bar. on the Sacramento side of the county
line, who have maintained gates across q
small strip of road connecting the Amador
and Sacramento county roads, They have
repeatedly petitioned the Supervisors of
this county for relief from the ANNOYANCE.
and few months ago that body instructed
the Road Overseer in that district to re-
move the obstruction.
Since then, however, certain neighbors OF
the parties who own the gates have sided
with the latter, and have used their infiu-
ence against the petitions of the Amador
people. The matter was again brought be-
fore the Board Yesterday by communica-
ton from G. g. Gilbert and others. of Am
ador, demonstrating against the mainten-
ance of the distractions and asking for their
removal. The remonstrance was directed
against the granting of privilege to Mrs
Dickinson TO erect another gate across the
road from Michigan Bar to Plymouth.
which, it was claimed. would work a hard
ship upon citizens of Amador county. who
desired snort and direct route to Sacra-
mento.
A petition from certain citizens of Michi-
gan Bar and vicinity. who favor the grant
ing of the privilege asked by Mrs. Dickin.
son, was also read.
The petition and remonstrance were
placed on file.
Mr.. Bates moved that the prayer of the
petitioner be granted, and Mr.. Tebbets OPP
posed 1t. He wanted the people of Anna
dor and all other contiguous counties to
Sacramento to have free ingress to this
county.
Mr.. Mccullough, of Amador, addressed
the Board on behalf of the professionals. He
said the signers of the petition for the oh.
struction are neighbors of the petitioner,
and had signed through mere sympathy
for her. But she is worthy lady who
is well-do-do, and the sympathy is mis-
placed. The road in question had been
travelled for thirty years, and Amador
county had recently constructed a road, at
considerable expense, to connect with it.
People in Amador who want to do bust
ness in Sacramento do not want to be shut
out by gates that are not necessary to the
iHlcCeStS Vi any PERSON. la pelltlOn were
desired, one fifty feet long could be had
from citizens of Amador.
"Close this road" he said, land you will
shut out the trade of whole township in
Amador county that wants to go to Sacra-
mento. We are not now travelling in the
days of 40, and we need more roads than
ever. When we built an expensive road
down to your county line, we did not ex-
pect to be shut out"
Mr.. Bates said he was in favor of the
Board laying out county road in that
vicinity that would dispose of the whole
matter and settle the gate question.
Mr.. Greer said that from what he could
learn the sentiment in the locality named
was in favor of the ''poor widow woman
and he was ready to vote in her favor at
any time.
Mr.. Mccullough replied that "the poor
widow" was well off and not in danger of
being injured by the removal of the gate
Mr.. rebbets suggested that I'VE build
stone wall around the county and shut
out ali intruders who might come here to
annoy our merchants"
After some further discussion the Board
voted to disregard the protest and allow
the gate to remain.