Daily tobacco leaf-chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1890-1895, 1891-08-20

FREE BRIDGES AGAIN.
What a County Magistrate Has to Say
on the Subject.


To the Tobacco Leaf Chrontcle.I
Since the subject of free bridges
shows no sign of tagging in interest,
doubtless it would be in order for a
representative of this district to say
something in regard to the matter.
Even if the Board of Mayor and
Aldermen have set down upon the
$1,000 appropriation, surely this is no
evidence of the weakness of the
forces that have undertaken to drill a
hole through the wall. BY no means
are the forces weak, and in a very
few years the wall will be 50 full OF
holes that it will collapse with such a
crash that the very life will be Jared
out of that lice and Vide. Ga0ake board
of Mayor and Aldermen. Whoever
heard of such enterprising steps on
the part OF men elected by the people
to see after the best interest and well
fare of the people! They seem to
think it Just and right that when a
country man goes to his county town
to patronize the business men, he
should be made to pay to get there.
Mr.. Merritt actually goes back to the
war, digs up out Of the dust and cob
webs old war claims, and says that
the Turnpike Company had no
money, and that its road bed was
greatly out of repairs on account OF
the four years use when no tolls were
collected. If Mr.. Merritt will permit
his great mind to look backward
little he will find not only the Turn
pike Company was out of money and
in bad fix, but everything else
shared the same fate. The city of
GAINESVILLE was in dilapidated con-
dition, and county affairs were the
same. The civil strife is over now
1.-THE rebellion | mean,) and the pub
lie is getting tired OF paying so-called
war claims. Since the $1,000 apprO-
priation was only cbimerical let's be-
gin at the next very important place
the lower Red river bridge. The
records on file establish the fact that
the city paid in 1853 so, 800 to free
the lower bridge. This sum was
paid to the stockholders of
the bridge that was built by private
citizens. The county was also a
large stakeholder, but was never
paid cent. After the city's bridge
fell down the town authorities then
claimed that, since they had been
compelled to pay the stockholders of
the old bridge large sum, and had
been compelled to erect the free
bridge at their own expense, they
ought to be allowed to issue bonds
and pay for the next bridge by levy
ing tolls. In plain terms, they meant
that the travelling public should
build the next bridge and
when built should be free.
The Legislature then in 1857
authorized the county to sell or
donate its interest to the town, and
authorized the town to erect free or
toll bridge over Red river. The
County court soon after (Apr., 1859
donated the county's interest to the
city upon condition that the town
would erect a good and substantial
bridge at the site of the old one. 1t
is clearly shown that the distinct
understanding with the city and
county, rs we'll as the peo-
pie, was that the bridge should
be free, as soon Us the bonds were
paid off. At length, in 1881, the last
of the bonds were paid of, but the
city, instead Of retaining its fidelity
with the public, and freeing the
bridge, issued new bonds to cover g
floating debt of its own, and secured
these new bonds by mortgage on
the bridge. Why was it so much |
more important for the city to have
a free bridge in 1858 than it is now
The mayor now openly declares that
The town of GAINESVILLE desires and |
intends to use the bridge as perma-
nent source of revenue to itself.
Will the Legislature of Tennessee,
which has put so much power in her
hands, allow her to so abuqe it?
BRAD MARTIN,
District q.
-