Norwich bulletin., 1909-08-21

fifty feet and the sidewalks curbed.
but this has not been done in Adelaide
street. So Mr.. Casey, as chairman of
the committee, objected to the accept
ance of the street under existing con-
ditions. Alderman Hilliar wanted to
see the street worked, as he considered
it public necessity. and knocked the
administration of which he is prom
inent part. in this style: Lets do
something; I'm afraid the administra-
tion viii be known as a do-nothing adj
ministration. Everything that is pro-
posed is knocked in the head"
seIectman HENDERSON, also Of the
First ward, who is considerably put out
over the failure to accept Adelaide
street and a crossing over to the
waters edge. came to the assistance
of the aldermani and struck out in this
style: You'd better let the railroad
have-he entire water front; 1t has
most of it already. The same state. of
affairs will exist when attempt IL made
to have boat landing at the loot of
Sparyard street"
At the suggestion of the mayor the
matter of accepting Adelaide street
and boat landing east of the railroad
track was tabled.
Selectman HENDERSON probably
struck the spike on the head when
attempt was made to have crossing
over the tracks of the New York, New
Haven & Hartford railroad tracks at
the foot If Sparyard street an APP
proach to the proposed public landing.
Ever since the fence in Bank street
between the Niagara engine house and
the Chappell property was removed 10
make public way for a short cut to
Fort Neck with a footbridge over
Shaws cove, thus opening what has
since been known as Sparyard street,
there has been spasmodic controversy
as to its exact dimensions AMI az to
how much of the street, so-called, Is
city property and what the city's and
individual rights. The project Of the
boat landing may cause revival Of the
controversy.
The land on the north side is owned
by the Chappells and that on the south
side by the Armstrong;, but when it
comes to the water ownership there
may be dispute as to property lines
and privileges. The Chappells have
now a fine wharf and coal pocket on
the line of their property with the
right under the federal laws perhaps.
to use the water on the south side of
the wharf.
Not so very many years ago the
Armstrong; drove line of piles along
what they claimed the line OF their
water property at this point. These
piles have since been removed. All
this. of course. is on the east side of
the railroad tracks.
The city claims ownership OF the
water front between these two prop
critics the width being from the Chap
pell to the Armstrong line and It's
use as a public landing might inter-
'fere with the Chappell berth along
side the wharf, with similar result
should the Armstrong; continue their
wharf property east of the tracks.
Yes: SeIectman HENDERSON is right,
and there may be even more trouble
over the extension of~Shipyard street
beyond the tracks than there is in the
Adelaide street proposition. 1t Is
hardly believed, vet it may be possible,
that the Chappells and the Armstrong;
may come to an amicable agreement
in the Sparyard street matter and
unite in an effort to prevent the city
from overreaching on private prop
erty.
Alfred H. Mitchell, large property
owner, asks to have his property on
the and west side of Pequot avenue
connected with stone crosswalk. In
his petition to the council he only asks
what would seem to be within his
rights as a taxpayer. as the cross
walk could be used by the public as
we'll as Mr.. Mitchell. He asks that the
walk be built under the direction OF
the highway commissioner. subject to
the approval of the street committee,
as is usual in such cases.
Il,tt Mr. Mitchell secs fit to do the
unusual. and asks that memorandum
of the cost be sent to him and that he
will nav the freight. This action is
so much out of the ordinary that II is
worthy of note. This petition should
be granted and the crosswalk built
forthwith.
Milo Benn, an alderman from the
Third ward, and chairman of the street
light committee, is up against prop
osition that is puzzling to him. Sew
eral resident taxpayers who desire TO
keep their premises shady at night,
have protested against so much light
in their neighborhood and request
that shades be placed on the electric
street lights so that their houses could
be illumined at their own sweet will,
and without the aid of street lights.
Alderman Benn says the usual de-
mand is for more light and that it
keeps him guessing how to supply the
demand and keep. within the appro-
priation. Should the street lights be
removed to accommodate the residen-
tial directors, then there would be Wig
orous kicking from the general public,
as-the street lights are placed where
they will be of the greatest good to
the greatest number, and, as Alderman
Milo puts 1t: $50 there you are, my
boy; and what's poor alderman TO
do they kick If you give them light
and they kick if you don't"
His associates in the council, when
Milo said he had no public cash to
buy shades for street lights. advised
him to ascertain who paid for the few
shades now in use, and that those
who want shades provide them. but
that they must not interfere with the
general lighting of the. streets. One
way to prevent the Objectionable light
from penetrating the rooms would be
to pull down the curtains or close the
blinds. AS a matter of economy there
are many who would be glad to have
their artificial light furnished free,
even if it was shed from the street
lights.
Once upon a time there were no
street lights in New London. tnen
came the gas and kerosene, and the
then modern naphtha street lights.
Perhaps there are some in New Lon.
don who would be glad for a return
of those good old nights.
Although Charles II. klinck was
first in the field and has the call in
the mayorslty nomination, new entries
are being made at frequent. intervals
and there is likelihood of large field
when the caucus roll is called, with
Mr.. Klinck at the pole. Among the