Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1901-11-21

All OF which is respectfully su omitted.
JOHN NARROWER
FRANK PLACE
FRANK BRANDT,
Sup. town of Mt. Hope
Mr.. Farris introduced the following
resolution:
To the Honorable Board of supervisors
RtsotUed, that a tax of 5000 be and the same
is hereby levied on the taxable property of
Grant county for roads and bridges for the
ensuing year. ID. FARRIs
On motion of Mr. Brown, the reso-
luton was referred to committee on
roads, bridges and ferries.
The resolution relating to property
not placed ON the assessment rolls IN
1901 was called up and on motion Of
Mr.. Blaine action on the same was
deferred until after the committee on
equalization report.
The county commissioners on the
Mt. Hope bridge reported as follows:
To the Hon. Board OF supervlsors:-Gen-
tlemen-Yonr committee which was ap-
pointed by the honorable chairman of
Grant county to act in conjunction with the
town board of supervisors of the town of
Mt. Hope in the matter of building an iron
bridge, respectfully submit that on the 9th
day of April, 1901, we met at a public letting
and contracted with the Massillon Bridge Co.
of Ohio. for an iron bridge for the sum of
$3.50 that being the lowest aud best bid that
the approaches To SAID bridge cost $50. total
cost of said bridge being $500 that we met
on Oct. 3. viewed said bridge and found said
bridge built in substantial manner and ac-
cept said bridge on the part of Grant Co.
All OF which is respectfully submitted,
WIN. LEIGHTON
JOHN KELLEY,
Co. Com miSsoners.
Report referred to committee on
roads, bridges and ferries.
The report of the committee on
roads, bridges and ferries on the PEE
tition of freeholders of the town of
jamestown for aid in building bridge
was called up and on motion of Mr..
| Brennan, Mr.. Smith of said town was
allowed to withdraw the petition and
no action was taken on the report of
committee.
Mr.. Leighton from the committee
on roads. bridges and ferries present.
ed the following report:
To the Hon Board of Supervisors Your
committee to which was referred the petit
ton from the town board of supervisors of
| Castle Rock asking county aid in the matter
1 of building three iron bridges, respectfully
report that the town of Castle Rock has con
4 strncted three iron bridges at a total cost OF
/ $2l04.45; that each bridge cost 10 exceed 4 of
! one per cent of all the taxable property ac-
cording to the eqnalzed valuations that the
town of Castle Rock is entitled TO the sum OF
Ali of which is respectfully submitted.
Signed by Com.
On motion of Mr.. Birch report was
adopted.
Mr. Leighton from the same COM
mittee also presented the following
report:
/ To the Hon. Board OF Supervisors: Your
Committee ON highways and bridges, to
which WAS referred the petition from the
1 town OF Paris asking county aid In building
/ two iron bridges, one across Little Platte in
section 10, the other across McAdams branch
in section %, town Of Paris.
/ Your Committee find that each bridge cost
! to exceed Il of one per cent OF all the taxa
/ BILE property according TO the last equaliZed
valuation. Your committee respectfully
recommends that Grant county pay 10 the
/ town OF Paris the sum Of 81 1912.
! All Of which we respectfully submit,
Signed by Com.
Report was adopted on motion of
Mr. Chandler.
The court house committee present.
ed the following report:
To the Honorable Board Of Supervisors:
| We, the undersigned committee to
whom was referred the matter of the
building of new courthouse in Grant
County at the adjourned session of the
county board held on the 18th day of
January, 1901, would respectfully re-
| port as follows:
We introduce to this board the report
made by the special committee to the
/ adjourned session of the board above
referred to for the reason that we think
that the matter contained in that report
| should come before the board at this
time. There was in attendance at the
| adjourned meeting of the board in Jan
uarv two competent architects who
came here with view to competing for
the building for the new courthouse
should the appropriation therefor be
made at thattime. Some doubt had been
expressed as to the real condition of
the vaults in the building and it was
deemed best by the committee TO have a
thorough examination of the vaults
made so that the committee and the
board could have a definite knowledge
Of what before had been rather specu-
lative. We accordingly hired the two
architects then in Lancaster to make
an examination Of the vaults and to
submit to US their written report of
their findings. The examination was
made Immediately after the adjourn
ment Of the board and their report was
as follows:
To Court House Committee Of County Board
OfSuperrisors:
GENTLEMEN:-At your request the
undersigned have made careful exam
ination of the vaults of your public court
house. to determine whether their con-
struction is such as to render them as
efficient protection TO their contents
from fire.
For that purpose we had the aid of a
mason and carpenter to assist our in
yestigation. We find as follows:
First, as to their construction. In
most cases these vaults are constructed
inside of the original walls of the build
ing, by building an eight inch wall
separated from the main wall by an air
space. At the windows the original
wooden windows were undisturbed.
and the air-space left open, extending
up to the floor joists above, no attempt
being made To cover this air-space with
IL. -.....-.-,.- .r-h Of The .a,,l- II