The Colfax chronicle. [volume] (Colfax, Grant Parish, La.) 1877-1981, 1893-04-15
Let the Truth be Told.
Editor Collar Chronicle:

/ noticed communication in an
issue of your paper some days ago,
and subsequently in the New Era,
signed Fright of Way" charging
G. III. Teal with the manipulation
of the police jury and railroading
a change in the Colfax and Mont
gomery road passing on the river
front through his premises. When
his attention was called to it and he
was asked why he did not deny and
set the public right in the premises,
Mr.. Teal said, no, that its author
was an interested party in this
landing controversy, and that he
would not fool the public. But it
seems he was mistaken judging
from the petition presented to the
police jury at their last sitting.
Now, let us see what are the
facts involved in this whole matter,
and just how far the public and the
police jury have been imposed on.
First, it is true that the river bank
caved badly during the entire sum-
and fall Of 1892, and he had to
move his fence three times; each
time not only loosing a part of his
crop but mourning the expense of
removing his fencing, etc. The
public at the same time being
greatly Inconvenience by having
to travel over newly plowed ground
that during wet weather was al
most impossible for any kind Of
vehicle. This caused universal
demand for change in the raod,
to which Mr.. Teal objected saying
it would neccesitate to him the
trouble and expense of another line
of fence at least three-quarters of
a mile in length.
He continued his opposition un-
til late in December, when it was
noticed that quite q slip of land
was breaking loose and settling
preparatory to sliding in the river
and l told him in presence of Mr..
Kelsoe and others that if he did
not change the road, his house
would in a few years be in danger
by this continuous caving of the riv-
or banks He laughingly replied,
"all right, if the police jury see fit
to pass an ordinance to that effect
I will undergo the additional. ex-
pense of another line of fence"
The ordinance was passed and /
was appointed overseer, and in
that capacity pressed him to make
the change at once as l was press
ed by the public to work the road
and saw no use in working the old
road, and as road overseer and with
the consent of Mr.. Teal, and as /
understood the ordinance of the
police jury, I made the change.
It is the almost universal verdict
of the public that the new road is
shorter, far superior and much
more safe than the old one, and
just how a set of men composing
our parish Legislature could SO far
forget their duty to the public in
such matters, and take up a pri-
vate quarrel and litigation be-
tween Mr.. Teal and Mr.. Hyde, ]
cannot understand. Twill do them
the justice to say, however, that
after reflection they undid what
they had done in this matter on
the first day of their sitting and
decided to let the matter remain
in statue quo, to await the judg-
ment of the courts thereon. Ad-
hitting the interest of the travel
ing public is better subserved by
the new road than the old, this ]
submit should alone guide their
action in relation to roads in the
parish.
Now, as to the Hyde-Teal con.
troversy, with which the parish
has no concern, and where the shoe
pinches Mr.. Hyde. The fact is
Hyde has been using Teal's land
ing for several years over Mr.. Teal's
protest. The change in the road
made it convenient for Mr.. Teal te
fence the Buckeye landing in his
field, which forced Hyde to sue fol
his rights (if he has any, instead
of having Teal sue him for poses
sion, or enjoin him from using hi
landing, which he assured me las
fall was his intention of doing Oh
account of the way Hyde had treat
ed him in the handling of cottol
seed during last season.
| l write this in hopes of givinl
an unprejudiced public a fair state
ment of the whole matter.
| Yours, l.. M. TOWNSEND.