Connecticut western news., 1895-05-02
THURSDAY, MAY 3, 1895
HARTFORD BRIDGE SCHEME.

HARTFORD BRIDGE SCHEME.
 Likened unto the Rich and Selfish Biz
 cyclist-CorporaIs-A the One-sided
 Bargain Maker. A few Words about
 the Majority Report of the Judiciary
 Committed.
 One of the richest men in Connecti- cut owned an old wooden bicycle which he had used many years. Two years ago he discovered the old wheel need cd repairs, and was unsafe for him to use. This rich man was too selfish to repair his own wheel, but he had the cheek to ask his neighbors to pay for the repairs. The neighbors thought it was . very unique, peculiar and un- reasonable request, but they did not like to offend their rich townsmen therefore they agreed to 'chip in" and repair bis wheel. The rich man had the agreement put in writing, but he shrewdly substituted the word ''main- tain" for the word ''repair." After the agreement was signed, instead of hay ing the old wheel repaired he makes so-called contract with a bicycle agent to furnish him a new model steel wheel, and then he asks his neighbors to pay for the new wheel. The neighbors say they did not 80 understand the agreement. They did not in- tend to buy him new wheel but merely agreed to repair his old wheel The rich man says they agreed to maintain" him 8 wheel; and the old wheel is not safe, therefore his neighbors must pay for new one. One of these neighbors strongly objects to paying for the new wheel. whereupon the rich man rises up and to that neigh bor he says 'I pay fourteen times as much taxes to the state ss you do. there fore you have no right to object to buying 8 new wheel for my own use" Then the other neighbors rise up and say to this rich man. We also object to buying you new wheel. We simply intended to repair your old one. If we must buy you new wheel. then each and all of us want new wheels and you must help pay for them. That will tax you more than it will tax us. !" One of this rich mans sons thinks his father is very unwise and unfair in ask ing the neighbors to buy him new wheel or even repair the old one. This whole story may not be literally true. We cannot vouch for 1t. It looks to us like an allegory illustrating the Hart ford bridge question in the legislature.
 It is related that a Union volunteer, who had enlisted as a private in the civil war. wrote home to his family that he had been promoted to corporal. His wife read the letter aloud. whereupon all the children began to dance and shout, "We are all corporals now!" The wife exclaimed, "Shut up. there IS no one corporals but your father and Ip' This story illustrates the Hartford bridge matter. If any one thinks that the act passed by the legislature of 1893 provides bridges for every town in the state they will soon discover that only Hartford and East Hartford were made co-porals by said act.
 We have heard of certain man. whom we will name Al walking homeward one morning in very unhappy frame of mind. A neighbor whom we will call O met him and observing his sullen dsmeanor enquired the cause. A re- piled, II never was so unfairly treated in my life. wanted to make 8 deal with B and in my own mind I had com pleted the details of good bargain for myself. have just called on B and he will not accept my proposition. The foregoing is similar to the Hartford bridge question. Hartford wants the state to build it new bridge, and ii thinks itself unfairly treated because the state objects to such proposition.
 The majority report of the judiciary committee concerning the Hartford bridge is wise. equitable and logical solution of the problem. Said report does no injustice to the towns benefit. ted by the proposed new bridge, does no injustice to The Berlin Iron Bridge Co.,, does no injustice to the state, and casts no reflections on the legislature of 1893. It does no injustice to the bridge commissioners although it throws some light on their methods of procur. ing the act of 1893. Both branches oi the legislature ought to endorse said re, port, and we believe they will. The signers of said report have done theil duty fearlessly, and they are entitled to the ssupport of all fair-minded men. They are in favor of repeating the act ol 1893 because they believe it is right to repeal it. Such an unjust law ought to be repealed; and, by the way, that law is not the only unjust one on the statute books that ought to be repealed or amended. We hope the present legisla. ture of Connecticut will prove to be g model in all respects, and that at least the majority of it's members will demon strate by their votes that they would .'rather be right than to be president oi the United States" The state and the nation expect righteous laws from the