The Norfolk weekly news-journal. (Norfolk, Neb.) 1900-19??, 1908-05-29
PAVING IS PARAMOUNT
MAYOR STURGEON TAKES UP
FIRST STREET PROPOSAL.
AN ANSWER TO A. J. DURLAND
Mayor Sturgeon Declares Paving
Should be First Municipal Work
Taken up-oHers Objections to the
First Street Scheme.

Norfolk, Neb.. May %, 19OS.-Ed.
itor News: | beg space in your val.
ued paper to reply to Mr.. A. j. Dur.
lands article under date OF May 20,
1908, in which he asks the present
administration to CXpcnd $500 on
First street the coming year Mr..
Durland says he thinks 1t Is not pos
sible to pave Main street. However,
he fails to give any reason why. The
required number Of property owners
on Norfolk avenue have signed the
petition for paving, and are all ready
to have the street paved. AS | was
elected on the paving issue, the paw
ing of the business section shall be
the first public improvement that will
be considered, and nothing else shall
be allowed to interfere 50 far as | am
concerned. Neither the macadamiz-
ing of First street nor any side street
nor the purchasing of a park, will be
given any consideration by the city
until the paving is accomplished, If |
can help it, wish to go on record
right here, that am unaltcrably OPP
simple reason that it is unfair unjust,
unreas soma BILE and discriminating
against the majority of tax payers in
the interest of a favored few.
First street is not a travelled street
compared with Third or Fourth
street. The vast amount expended
last year on First street was entirely
out of proportion and should have
been distributed in other sections of
the city, and the present deplorable
condition of our streets and crossings
are in at this time proves the folly Of
the expenditure.
Mr. Durland goes on to say that the
Junction people want this. Now to
see the folly of the argument, a man
living on Fourth street just west of
the Junction wishing to come up town
on Mr.. Durlands macadamiZed road,
must go four blocks out of his way
in order to do so. Again Mr.. Durland
argues, property on East Norfolk av-
enue will be much benefited by keep
ing the travel on First street. That
argument Is not true for the simple
reason that you cannot make water
run up hill. The town will naturally
seek the natural or most desirable av.
enues of business. The writer well
remembers when the OXnard hotel
was built that one of the chief argu
ments was that East Norfolk property
would Immediately commence tC
boom. Where is the boom since the
ONnard was built? Does the present
condition prove the truth of the ar
gument? If Mr.. Durland wishes tc
hold property values on East NorfolE
avenue, let him get his coat off ant
help the present administration pave
Norfolk avenue and not block the
wheels of progress by trying to side
track the public interest to FRS
street. Mr.. Durland cunningly throws
the present mayor and council bou
quet in the argument for First stree
macadamized road by saying that tn
public would rise up and call then
blessed. The present mayor has new
err had many bouquets handed him
and is not looking for that kind o
notoriety. He is trying to do hi
plain, honest duty and his motto is
do the greatest good to the creates
number. Equal rights to all and spe
cial privileges to none"
Give First street it's pro rata O
work, and no more, no less. TIL
same with every other street in on
city.
]. d. Sturgeon, mayor.