St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-01-21
FACTS OF THE CASE.
Misapprehensions Relative to the
Broadway Bridge Question.

Broadway Bridge Question.
To the Editor of the Globe.
There are some who are not surprised
at the daily articles In the Pioneer Press
regarding the Broadway bridge We
expected ii. We know why it takes this
up as if it were personal matter. We
know the source from which 1t ema-
mates. 1t is unjust and unfair The
article the other day headed m unici-
pal Folly" and the editorial of the same
date are Misrepresentation, false, de-
celying and trying to hoodwink the
public. 1t is creating the impression
among the citizens that the bridge is to
be built at once. 1t has daily interviews
with business men regarding the build
ing of the bridge at present. The other
night the business mems union, through
the same source, of which union am a
member, but was prevented from being
present, passed resolution poStponing
the building of the bridge. Now all
these people do not know what they are
talking or kicking about.
l will venture to make the
bold assertion right here that there
are not fifty men in st. Paul
today, including all aldermen, city Off
Gals and attorneys connected with the
intelligently understand the exact stat
US of the Broadway bridge. The Pho
neer Press can go onfor a whole year,
and fill its columns daily with inter-
views opposed to the building of the
bridge at present. No one wants it
now. Even among its most enthusiastic
supporters there is not one that is in
favor of having it built at present.
Why? First, because the city's debt is
large enough. Secondly, because 1t will
take more than three years before all
the suits in this matter will be settled
and before the building of the bridge
can be recommended. --..
The question today before the public
is not whether or not the bridge shall he
built at once, but the real matter at issue
is: Does Mr. Hill or the city of st. Paul
own Broadway below Third? Is there
any one in st. Paul with the exception
of Mr.. Hill and the Phone er Press, that
does not want this decided, and with the
utmost expedition? Is it not for the
best interest of the city at large to have
this matter settled as soon as possible?
TO ascertain whether this disputed land
Is owned by the city or MIR. Hill? This
is all the supporters of the bridge want
now, and not the building of the same.
Can any fair-mnded citizen find fault
with this? No, | think not
How is this, then, to be accomplished?
Simply by bringing the case of The
Great Northern Railroad VS.. City of
st. Paul to trial. But this cannot be
brought to an issue until the city legally
| changes the grades of streets intersect-
ing Broadway. There is an injunc-
ton now granted against the
| city. mainly because it has not
| conformed to the law in regard
| to the change of grade of streets, and
1 wish to impress every one with the
| fact that the injunction cannot be dis
| solved and the case of the Great North
ern brought to trial before the city
changes the grade of streets according
to law. This change of grade is not
done with pick and shovel. but is done
| on paper, the same as drawing plan
for a house. The preliminary order for
the same has already passed both bodies
| of the council. and the board of public
works has reported favorably ON it, and
now the final order is before the assem-
| bly, instructing the board to complete
the work already begun. 1t will be no
expense to the city. Only after this is
done can the case of the Great Northern
| and the land in dispute be brought to an
issue, and not before. The supporters
| of the Broadway bridge want this done.
| Can any citizen have any objection to
this?
| would ask the Pioneer Press if it is
in favor of ever having the claim to this
disputed land settled, and | would sug-
| geSt that when interviewing citizens, in
stead of creating the impression that the
bridge is to be built at once, it would
| ask them whether or not they are in
| favor of ascertaining whether Mr.. Hill
or the city of st. Paul is the owner of
| Broadway below Third, and the answers
it would receive would be quite different
in tone than it has been publishing. AS
l said before, the most ardent supporters
OF the bridge do not expect the work to
be recommended on the same for over
three years. as it will fully take that
long to settle all suits connected with
the same. The case affecting the land
in dispute will be appealed to the SUI
| preme court, no matter who loses
or wins, and if it should be
| finally decided thaG Mr.. Hill owns the
land the people Of lower town may not
want the bridge at all; for in that case
land for the approaches and piers would
have to be condemned. and this would
be a greater expense than they would
| perhaps want to pay for, as these dam
| ages would have to be paid for by prop
erty benefited. Now, all we want is to
have this question as to the title de-
| cided, and ! think the sentiment of the
public is overwhelmingly with US.
BENEYQLE.