Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1900-01-25
The vote on Mr.. Persons motion fol

Il Yes-Sharpley, Ledden, Stranger. Pier
son, silvers, Tombleson, Miller, Handle,
Jones-9
No-Cooper, Bender, Wilson, Hendrick-
son, synnott, Knight, Nichols, Walton,
Tonkin-9.
The Director decided the motion lost,
when John Lodge arose aud said that he
had appeared before this Board for the last
f time. This road was swindle from start
to finish. Instead being constructed of
J stone it was one quarter sand and loan.
The people had not been accorded decent
! courtesy here, but would have fair hear
ing before higher tribunal.
/ Mr.. Nichols arose and appealed to the
Director that Mr.. Lodge was out of order,
} but that gentleman finished his talk with
the consent of the Director.
Mr. Walton explained his vote, as based
on the opinion that the road committee
should be present when the hearing was
had.
Mr.. Nichols experienced a change of
heart, and asked that the vote by which
Mr.. Persons motion was lost be recon-
sidered by UiUe U0ce vote. Carried.
The Director put the motion and the
ayes came in a chorus aud the nays scat
tering and weak, and afterward the hear
Room.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
/ At / 80 D. m /, the afternoon session
opened in the Court Room, the members
of the Board being assembled within the
Bar, and the Paulsboro Swedesboro road
petitioners, to the number of about fifty, in
front.
Mr., John H. Brown was given
privilege of addressing the Board
and on behalf of the property owners
abutting said road, returned thanks for the
courtesy extended.
He addressed himself first to history
of the road, which was begun on March s,
1898. He said he paid little att ntion to
its construction until workmen reached
his property, half mile from the starting
point. First layer OF stone was put on, and
rolled, then layer of sand was shoveled in
and raked in and that was rolled. Protests
were made on all sides that the contractor
was filling the road with sand, yet ths
work went on, the only satisfaction given
being F." wait till the road is completed"
So the property owners waited and vailed.
In November public meeting was held,
and an expert employed to measure the
road and the road was found to measure
little over six inches. Acce ptance of the
road was deferred, and the contractor was
called to complete the road. He put three
or four inches of stone and gravel on in
| PaulsbOro to a point below the M. E.
church. Then skipped distance, and SO
on along the road. At Asbury, no stone was
| put on.
| Then another measurement was made
by the Board, and one was made at the re-
/ quest of the property owners by Henry s
| Halnes, who found an average depth of
704 inches, There was no regularity of
depth, which varies from four and a half
to ten and half inches, and right in the
| town OF Paulsboro the depth was six and a
halt inches. In places the stone mas all
large, and in others all small. In one
instance the stone and sand taken out was
sifted, and the pile OF sand sfted cut was
larger than the pile of stone.
In closing he said he was sorry to come
before the Board with this protest, but we
would be derelict in our duty as
citizens if we failed to make this protest.
| The contract calls for eight inches of stone
and stone only, and serious question with
the people, and for this Board to answer
was what mysterious, what mesmeric in
| fuence, what magnet power did this con-
tractor exercise over the engineer, super
visor and committee to secure the accept
ance of this road in the conditi n it was
accepted. This Board was imposed on by
its own agents, both the State and county
had been cheated, and now your COM
missioner to assess benefits says to us, you
must be cheated, too.
We are here to protest against the latter
part Of the program, and if you insist on it
we mnst 9nneaI to the eonrtS
We ask you to put this road up to the
stipulation of the contract, but if you find
this an impossibility, withdraw this com
mission and we will take our share of loss
with the balance of the county.
| Ex-Judge B S. Cox opened his remarks
by asking if a road contract called for a
road ten feet wide and eight inches deep,
what constituted a fulfillment of the con-
tract, and Director Miller answered If it
averaged eight inches in depth, then it
was an eight inch road
Mr. Cox said the general idea was that it
must be eight inches in all its parts. He
stated the case of road in Burlington
county, that was up to the measurement
in all parts except where there had been
big fill, yet acceptance was refused until
brought up to full measurement.
| There was no question, he said IS to-
what this road should be, and none as to
what it was. Even at the time the road
was accepted the measurement showed it
was not up to the contract.
The engineer did not do his duty. He
did not think be was dishonest, and does
not think he received any money, but he
did not do his duty as a servant of the
Board.
| The matter OF the construction of stone
road is matter of arithmetic. 1t would
take certain number of car loads of stone
to build road ten feet wide, eight inches
thick and six miles long how came i'll
then. be asked, that this contractor had
car load after car load of stone to sell after
he had secured the acceptance of this road
The property owners on this road would
not compromise with fraud. They had
taken up this fight from principle, and ifI
you deny us Justice the contract for the
construction of this road will be read and
e-read 10 this court house until every child
in the county is familiar with it, and read
to, BY people who charge we'll for reading.
Mr. B. g. Paul said the Board had failed
to build the road according to contract
| He had retained figures of the measure
ment and they showed that in Sc out of
270 openings made by the expert for pur-
pose of measurement, the road was six
inches and less thick in a. places, eight
to eleven and three quarter; so places, six
to six and three quarter 1870 places, seven
to eight inches thick. Over a distance OF
200 feet, it was from four and half to
SIX and half inches on the crown. In a
certain mile and quarter, if the sand was
out, il was not more than four inches in
thickness.
John Lodge asked about the contractors
bond, but nobody made reply. He said
the road was built Just as it come-in some
places the big stone were on the bottom.
where they belonged, and in others on top,
where they did not belong. During it's
constr uctiOn we could get no definite in
formation from Supervisor Cooper. He
said the question had been asked how SO
much sand got in the road, and he referred
the questioners to DR. Laws,who had solved
the problem. He closed by declaring if
the Board persisted in this assessment, we
will try its legality in the courts
DR. Laws said the sand was sh0veled in
by two Irishmen These men who protest
against this road are not cranks, but plain
business men, and substantial citizens.
/ w. S. Thompson said that according to
the confract the first fnur-inch laVer nj