Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1908-03-09
ATTITUDE OF The LOCAL PRESS
ON The QUESTION.
The Herald Stood Alone in ODDos:-
ZION TO the Scheme From the
Start. Goth the Other paDers
Thought Proper to Support II Be.
cause 1t Seemed Popular.

Now that the visionary scheme TO
begin the filling of Aberdeen's tide
lands at the cost of suburban proper-
ty has been put to sleep, it may be
possible for the council to evolve a
plan for filling streets-not lots
that will be founded on business
sense and will meet with the approval
or the people. If so, some return NAV
be had for the large sum of money
expended in exploiting the defunct
measure, in engineering and other
| expenses.
1t is interesting to note the atti-
tude of the local press on this most
important question. The Bulletin
devoted columns to it's support ever
since it was mooted last summer. and
is now wondering how it came to do
SO. The daily paper evidently wanted
to be right, but the slogan of the
schemers, to 'fill the lands, and be
progressive" carried away that pa
per, as well as many others-includ-
ing councilmen--who failed to look
into the proposition
The Post was it's most rabid advo-
cate and is really hurt that it's pet
scheme failed to come through, as
will be seen from the following wall
emitted in it's last issue:
The sonorous chant of the frogs in
the very heart of the city may be
music that appeals to an old duck
hunter like Landlord Gibler, one of
the strong opponents of the fill, but
there be people with homes on the
flats who would erioy having streets,
lawns and garder !. 1t is but a ques-
tiOn of time"
The Herald, which has ever advo-
Gated all reasonable improvements
for Aberdeen, took the unpopular, but
correct view of this plan from the
start, and is now in position to in
dulge in the pleasure of saying, "We
told you so." This attitude is shown
by the following editorial, printed
i August 80, 1907, the day after the
council adopted the silly resolution:
''The adoption of resolution by
the city council last night providing
for filling the tideflats, is all right as
a means of finding out the cost of
such an improvement, but as a salts
factory measure, was the work to be
done according to it's terms, it can
hardly be so considered.
I'm the first place the estimated
cost is more than double what the
property affected should be required
to pay at present valuations This
estimate is based on a three-foot fill
at the price made by the American
Dredging Co., 16 cents per yard. This
figure is too high. The company has
taken contract from the govern
ment to take this earth from the
river bed at Is cents per yard, and
must dispose of the debris. Five
cents per yard would leave a profit
after paying the cost of piping to the
land to be filed, besides saving the
! cost of carrying the earth to sea or
elsewhere, SO that for or 10 cents
per yard the company would net
neat sum.
Again, the estimate is on a three
foot fill, which might well be reduced
foot, to allow for gravel and paw
ing in the future to bring it up to
grade. The grade south of Market
street might be lowered so as to give
better drainage to surface water,
and the streets in the fire district
should be included in the fill. There
is no good reason why this land
should not be filled high enough for
all practical purposes for sum not
exceeding SIS lot"