Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1911-04-21

could not have continued independently
! across Whetstone brook and connected
with its own line They have owned
south of the brook many years and the
west side has been owned by the Twin
state Gas Electric company and avail
! able under the law had they seen fit to.
take IL. The only reason, apparently,
| that they have crossed the arch on the
vermont Valley iron over milestone
| brook is to save expense. The YER
mont valley land along the whole ter
| ritory from West river down is narrow.
The only yard the Vermont Valley owns
IN Bratteboro is along this point and
! the shelf there is much narrower than.
1t is south of Bridge street. At the
Vermont Valley engine house the space
is crowded, yet the Vermont Valley per-
mits the Central Vermont to have its in
dependent track past there
1t is inequtable and unjust that the.
| central Vermont should have this right in
dependently north of Milestone brook and
refuse the Boston & Maine this short
space in the corner of their yard south
of milestone brook, when the Central
Vermont can be provided with substi-
tute room all without expense. Brat
tleboro people feel keenly the injustice
of the position of the Central Vermont
They ask for a chance to show up their
proposition to the legislature and get
the relief which they feel certain win
be given.
Move to Save Disaster.
This whole move is by citizens of Brat
tleboro and Wndham county and is ID
plan to have the Boston & Maine build
on the Vermont shore and save the dis
aster which will come to Brattleboro IL
the road is built in New Hampshire
! The reply of the Boston & Maine is a
fair one. Mr.. Melen says he will gladly
build in Vermont if he can be provided
with an Independent line. Brattleboro
! must procure it for him in some way.
Central Vermonts Brief.
The Central Vermont brief on the au-
thority of the public service commis-
I sion to hear the petition of Brattleboro
| and its railroad committee for a modi-
| fication or suspension of the order OF
Sept. 10 for the abolshment of the
Bridge street crossing has arrived, sew
eral days overdue. After naming sew
eral reasons of technical nature why
the commission has no right, in the
opinion of the Central Vermont road to
rehear the matter the brief says that the
conclusive reason is that the decree is a
consent decree BY consent decree is
meant decree made upon agreement
of the parties. 1t says: After a con-
sent decree has been entered the court
! has no power to change, modify or va
cate the same without like consent un-
less it appears that such decree con-
| te'iHa NiSi iNhl SAipi VI WAS ODtalntd Dy
! fraud"
1T is not certain" the brief says.
| that the existing decree is not pre-
cisely what they want. Their petition
states that they have information from
| some source that some other corpora-
tion may at some time build another
railroad through the village of Brattle-
boro, or somewhere in the state of New
Hampshire. and that in either event the.
overpass provided for in the existing
decree might not be applicable to such
changed conditions.
1T is a novel idea that this commits
sion would suspend the operation Of it's
consent decree indefinitely for the pur-
post of allowing some one to formulate,
schemes and build other roads. These.
petitioners in former proceedings asked
for an overpass. They determined UPON
the kind of an overpass they wanted
They agreed with this petitionee and
other parties interested upon the kind or
an overpass they should have, and the
agreement was the basis for the decree
they are now seeking to have vacated
Under these circumstances this COM
mission should not change or suspend
the decree in the former proceedings, il
IL mad the right to do So and it GER
tainly does not have that right"
Reply Of Petitioners.
The petitioners yesterday forwarded
to the commission a reply to the Cen
tral Vermont brief. 1t was in effect a.
reteration of its former brief that the
commission was charged with a con-
tnuous duty OF supervision, in the inter
ests of public safety, convenience and
accommodation. and that for the com
mission to hold that an order of the,
character in question could not be re-
viewed by it no matter how impracti--
cable changed conditions might make IT,.
would be nullifying the plain intent of
nh O Nrirt
functions.