The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1899-05-12
WANT SPR|NKLINC
Freeholders Say Boulevard
Branch Would Be All
Right IF Watered.
COMMISSIONERS HELD RESPONSIBLE
No Agreement Reached Yes
terday Because Birdsall
Was Not Present.
COMMISSIONERS HELD RESPONSIBLE

be thrown out on the cold. cold world
without anybody to care for it. The
Boulevard Commissioners don't want it
because it has not, they claim, arrived
at the age of maturity; that is, that 1t
has not been completed. The Freeholders
on the other hand, contend that it is
completed so far as they have anything
to do with it, and that it is the duty of
the Boulevard Commissioners to take
charge of it. Commissioners Lewis and
Urquhart discussed the matter with the
Freeholders for two hours yesterday af-
ternoon without coming to an agreement.
COMMISSIONS Charles Birdsaql was not
present because he had not been notified
in time of the meeting, and he was at
tending business in connection with the
Boulevard Sidewalk Commission of which
he is also a member. Messengers were
despatched on bicycles to scour the Bou-
levard for the missing Commissioner. but
he could not be found, and in his absence
his colleagues were unwilling to consent
to any proposition made by the Freehol-
ders for the formal acceptance of the
coop" by them. No amount of argument
would induce them to alter their determi-
nation, so the adjourned meeting of the
Freeholders, at which the road was to
have been formally accepted from the
contractor and turned over to the Boule-
ward Commissioners was held and moth
ing was done. The Freeholders had
heard that the Boulevard Commissioners
would resort to the courts in mandamus
proceedings, if the county governing body
attempted to make the Commission the
custodian of the road against it's will.
The contractors counsel, Charles Cor
bin, said that his client would have moth
ing more to do with the road. He con-
tended that it was formally accepted by
the county when the final payment was
made on July 9 OF last year and that the
limit OF finding fault was January z last.
It was finally agreed, on motion of Free
holder Richardson. that the Freeholder
Special Committee, consisting of Simon
Kelly. F. Ripe and Ord Darling, would
confer with the Boulevard Commission
ers. when all the latter were present. and
would report to the Board at another adj
iaurned meeting on Monday afternoon
next what compromise could be effected.
The special committee of the Board of
Freeholders appointed to inspect the,
branch of the Boulevard and determine
who is responsible for its condition, gave
its decision. 1t reported that the con-
tractor has made repairs where they were
required and that where there has been
no traffic the surface is smooth and good.
The report continued 4
But we find that no sprinkling carts
ave as yet been put upon the road and
rluch of the work of repairs of the con-
tractor has again raveled up. The con-
r aaf0r ACTING hy adviao of coJtnca1 n0Si-
lively refuses to make any repairs of
those portions of the road which lave
raveled out between April / and date.
Without committing ourselves to the
rights or wrongs of his claim, We are of
the opinion that if the road had been
sprinkled during the dry spell of April it
would nave been in good condition.
The committee has obtained from
Messrs. Henry & McGibney an estimate
of the cost Of resurfacing, including
rolling, sprinkling before the roller and
sufficient screening to put the whole road
in a good condition. The cost is $1,000, but
we are satisfied that if this be lone and
the road not sprinkled as the work pro-
crosses the motley spent would be wasted.
If the road had been s%prinkled from
April l to date at the prices paid by your
Board last season the cost would have
been 81, 400.
I'VE find that irrespective of the need
of sprinkling for keeping the surface in
good condition, it is very much needed to
prevent the nuisance of dust which rem
ders the road very unpleasant for driving
and a detriment to the property of resi-
dents along its line. Basing our opinion
upon the presidents established by the
Board of Chosen Freeholders the care of
the main Boulevard and for the years
1897 and 1893 on the branch road of sprink-
ling the road as soon as opened, in part
or whole, to the public, we are convinced
that this duty carried, out by your Board
until the fall of 1898, devolved upon the
Boulevard Commissioner on their as
sumption of Office in December, 1898.
I'VE are decidedly of the opinion that
the road should be repaired at once,
either under the direction of your Board
or the Commissioners, or by joint action,
leaving the question of responsibility for
payment or liability of contractor to be
settled in the proper place in the courts
when done. Every days delay will in
crease the cost of the work and also de-
prive the public of the full use and en-
joyment of the road.
THE contractor will not move in the
matter further than he has done unless
placed in such a position that he will
be able to recover all or such portion
Of this cost as he may be able to show
the court is not a part of his contract.
Our opinion is that the branch Boule-
ward paving was finished and accepted
as contemplated by the act creating a
Boulevard Commission when your Board
accepted and paid the final estimate on
July 9, 1898, and that the duty Of sprink-
ling and other maintenance which was
then taken up by your Board and con-
tinued until December /, 1895, then de-
voIved upon the Boulevard Commission,
sIn conclusion, your does
not desire your board to stand upon any
technical point, but recommends that your
board act in conjunction with the COM
mission in an earnest effort to restore
this driveway to good condition, joint ac-
ton by both bodies ordering the work
done, with the understanding that the
question of responsibility for aymen
shall be settled in court, may be accepted
By the contractor as an order and ne
viii at once proceed with the work.
Meanwhile we would urge upon the
board to place before the Boulevard Cons