Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1897-07-22

MAI AOf tnelr wrongful neglect to
perform the duty devolved upon them,
they are liable in two ways.
A--By the remedy afforded the pub
lie, by presentment and indict-
ment by the Grand Jury
BIO the individual who shall re-
ceive damage or injury in his per-
son or property, by action at law
for such damage sustained. I am
led to this opinion by careful per.
sual OF the Common Law as cited
IN the cases determined in this
State, Of the Statute law of this
State and of the following de-
cisions rendered by the highest
Courts of this State, viz:
Freeholders of Sussex VS.. Strader, 3
Harrison, p 10S.
Bergen Freebooter VS.. State, 10 yroom,
p. 1858.
State vs.. Hudson Co, Vroon, p. 100.
Whitall vs.. Gloucester Freeholders, II
Vroom, p. 302.
Ripley vs. Essex Freeholders, II
Vroom, p. AS.
Jernee VS.. Monmouth, % Vroom.p. 553.
Freebooter vs.. Hough, 26 Vroom,
62S. Yours respectfully,
DAVID 0. WATKINS, Solicitor.
At the completion of this Mr.. Pierson
moved committee be appointed to have
the work on the Woodbury. bridge COM
pleted in accordance with the opinion of
the Solicitor, with power to have plans
prepared and specifications made with
authority to make contract after pro-
nOcolo oh II hox,<, hoo, n 4 =. AZ
county weekly papers.
Several members of the Board called
for more information concerning the
contemplated improvements. Mr.. Pier
son spoke at considerable length in ex-
PLANTATION and defence of his resolution.
1t was an exhaustive review of the facts
connected with the building of the bridge,
arguing that the city had always refused
to acknowledge its liability or response
bility, and that the county had in several
instances acknowledged both. The law
as given by the court, by Judge Clymer
in the case of the indictment of the city,
by late Solicitor Jessup and by present
Solicitor Watkins all unite in placing
upon the county the duty of completing
the work on the bridge, while the con-
struction free the city and make the
county chargeable. The combination of
law and facts, as they have been de-
veloped in our local governments since
the inception of the work, leaves the
county nothing to do except to finish its
unfinished work. The argument and
array of facts left room for but little
reply; indeed, there was no attempt to
controvert it. The feeling was rather
one indicating a willingness, if not de-
sire, to get rid of the bridge controversy,
even if the cost would be an apparently
heavy one. The impression was that the
Woodbury. bridge question was an an
noying and vexing one, and that it would
be good thing to finish the work as it
should be finished. Mr.. Pierson said
that the appropriation committee had
taken this expense into account when it
had made up its bridge expense items,
and that the work could be done within
the county's moneys already appropri-
ated for bridges. He concluded as follows:
"The county has never yet finished its
work in the completion of the bridge, as
required bv law and decisions of our
Courts. The question has never yet been
fully met of the responsibility of the
Board to complete the approaches to the
bridge. There was time when the
members of the Board exercised the
physical and mental faculty to say no,
when they should have said yes"
Freebooter Miller said he was tired,
sick and disguised with hearing of the
bridge. and trusted the matter would be
disposed of
Mr.. Usinger said There is not a
man in this county who knows what that
bridge cost. The bridge never was con-
structed properly, and the Board was too
slow to head off the contractor. I want
it understood that I positively refused to
serve On the committee which built that
bridge"
On motion of Mr. Miller, the matter
was laid over until the afternoon session,
SO that the members could visit the bridge
and see for themselves what work needed
to be done.
At the afternoon session the motion
was again brought up and passed, Mr..
Miller wanting to defer further action
until the next meeting, owing to the fact
that he believed the cost would exceed
the estimate of $500.
The following were appointed as the
committee: Messrs. Pierson, 81. j. Hen
Erickson, Starr, Knight, Usinger.
The following by Mr.. Pierson was
unanimously adopted:
WHEREAS, with the passing of the years those
who marched with the flags in the battles in
the late rebellion are rapidly passing away, and