Thibodaux commercial journal. (Thibodaux, Lafourche Parish, La.) 191?-1959, 1910-07-06

The free bridge Controversy has
again had it's second airing before
the Legislature of this State. Last
Monday the free bridge represented
by six people. interested in the
welfare of the town and parish the
names being mentioned in our last
issue, armed with a petition signed
by over one hundred people, all
secured in one day or less, and fol-
lowed by some ten or fifteen tele-
grams appeared before the commit
tee on Public Works Land and
Levees. The hearing had been set
for Monday night but it was not
until Tuesday that a hearing was
possible as Mr.. Gay, the man with
his parish full of free bridges, had
the bill locked up in his desk and
failed to return six people had to
be Inconvenience. On Tuesday he
did not show up so key was Sc
cured for his desk and the same
opened and the bill taken therefrom.
Out of fifteen on the committee
only II were present and after both
sides had been heard a vote was
taken resulting in favorable re-
port of to 5, the same vote that
had been received against favor
able report four years previous.
Those voting for it, and favor
able report were Mangham, Nc
Clelland, Martien, Dauterive Fur
low, Hunsicker, those against were
Leopold, Chairman, Johnson (Madi
SOM Delahonssaye, Rhodes and
Barker. The opposition gave notice
of minority report and in the
very words of Attorney w. E. Ho-
well they made their report and
signed it, showing that the attorney
representing the opposition, who
ever that was, drew up the report.
No inkling was given or no authorl-
ty was shown by Mr.. Howell as to
whom he represented. We have no
doubt that he was there as an attor
ney for some bridge interests, as 1t
was certain that the free bridge fol-
lowers represented the people.
Judge w. P. Martin had appeared
before the same committee the
week previous and had it not been
for his appearance the report would
have been made that week and the
law would have been passed, but
the States IN. o. and several pc
pie on the ground are our authority
for stating that he said that there
was serious objection to the bill
in Lafourche. We can not under
stand how Judge Martin, as Judge,
could have permitted himself to
take sides in the controversy as
there isno telling but what the mat
ter can come before him in his Of
fetal capacity. We think the Judge
made a mistake in so acting.
The unfavorable report how
ever avaiIed nothing. The cele-
brated Mr.. Gay, who will not
give people the same privileges
in another parish that he enjoys
in his on, last Thursday made a
motion on the floor of the House
to indefinitely postpone the bill,
and Hon Roberts Roberts moved
for it's engrossment and advance
ment to third reading, and the bill
was ordered advanced after Mr..
GAYS motion had been lost by a
vote of AZ. to "a, ,seven of the free
bridges votes being absent. Mr..
Roberts bad a telegram from
Col. Albert j. Trone endorsing
the bill and giving it his hearty
support. Our other representa-
tive Mr.. Barker opposed it and
did all he could against it, that
was his privilege and possibly
his interests, but it was Certainly
not to the interests of his people.
We understand that the opposing
representative took exception
because we did not have him tC
introduce the bill. We feel that
we were wise and guessed his
position right in giving it into
the hands of a friend. His state
ment that we slighted him i:
identically the same as the twt
representatives from this parisl
whom he succeeds. We only re
greet that Col. Trone was absen
otherwise there would have beer
some tall fighting in the House.
At this writing We do no
know the fate of the bill, but tn
attendance is SO slight that W
scarcely believe there is ghos
of show for its passage. Ther
was much satisfaction in havln
our measure endorsed by a re
preventative com mittee of stat
body-the General blJ
Sentiment in both houses wa
with US and none of. them coul
understand the position of tn
police jury or town, council. tn
opposition made one fact strol