Waterbury evening Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1887-1895, 1891-03-03

Committees Action Looks Like ESsl
acting a Bride.
In reply to the proposition made by
the selectmen and the town committee
in regard to the Tramway company's
layout, the following sharp letter has
been made public:
To the Selectmen and Committee of the
Town of Waterbury,
Gentlemen: Your communication of
February 2Sth duly received and con-
tents noticed, We respectfully decline
t. entertain the proposition therein con.
tanned for the following reasons, to wit
| list. You have no authority to impose
any such conditions upon us,-and
ed. The conditions imposed are I'M
reasonable and unjust. 49,, /
The law imposes plain and imperi-
tive duty upon you, to wit =: ITO fix and
determine the grade upon which
the tracks shall be laid and the position
/ of the street with reference to the center
line thereof, through which they may
rum" The performance of this duty
you seek to avoid and refuse to comply
with the law, except upon the condi-
tions mentioned in your Communication,
| Upon what principle of right or jus
tice you can justify your conduct IN re-
fusing to comply with a plain provision
of law, unless we will consent to some
bargain as condition precedent to your
performance, we are unable to under
stand. 1t looks very much to us like
exacting bride to secure the perform
ance of a learlegal duty,
As to the conditions embodied in your
communication you must know that the
law forbids the laying of tracks wher-
ever you decide that there is insufficient
room for public travel, unless we at our
own expense widen the highway but
torequlre us to make an agreement to
| widen Chapel street as a condition pre-
cedent to fixing the grade and location,
would put us at the mercy of the land
owners to pay any price they might
choose to ask. We cannot believe that
you intend TO place us at such a disad-
vantage, but rather, that you arrived at
this decision without due consideration.
As to withdrawing the petition to the
general assembly, we cannot see why
this should be required, as the granting
of the petition would in no way affect
the town of Waterbury, if you perform
your duty under the present law before
that time.
AS to giving the bond required, the
law prescribes what our duties are with
reference to the building of the road,
and that you should require anything in
addition seems 10 us to be unreasonable.
Your last proposition that we shall
amend our cnarter, is not only unreaSOn-
able, but absolutely impossible. You
must know that we have no power to
amend our charter. Only the general
assembly possesses that power. That
body has done no business this session
so far, nor is there any probability that
they will do any. Further, that matter
is not embraced in the pending applica-
ton, nor can it now be engrafted in it.
and the general assembly, if in the con.
dition to do business, would not at this
time listen to any suggestion.
Finally, we have all along had the i'm
preston that the building of the road
would be of some public benefit, that
the promoters of the enterprise would
have to wait many years before they
could see any return for the money in
vested, and during all this time the pub
lie would be the only party benefited,
but if the public are satisfied to have
such a project defeated simply because
their agents refuse to perform their
plain duty, except upon unreasonable
and impossible conditions, then we will
endeavor to be also and seek other more
favorable places in which to invest our
money.
, The Naugatuck s. Waterbury Tram
way Co.
GEO E. TERRY, ATTORNEY.
Waterbury, March 8, 1891.