Norwich bulletin. [volume] (Norwich, Conn.) 1895-2011, 1915-04-07

where now the state is at no expense |
by reason of the Norwich Free Acad- |
envy. The trustees, with the exception
of Mr.. Williams, and all he had spoken
with among the citizens of the town of
Norwich were opposed to separation In
response to queries from Mr.. Higgins
be told of the work of charitable insti-
tutions that would be affected by the
proposed change which are located out
side of the city lines. Most of the pro-
posed new town is largely residential
and is part of the old historic part of
Norwich.
Resolutions Against Separation.
Mr.. Higgins read the vote passed by
The Dime Savings bank directors pro-
town of Norwich. A similar vote was
lead from the directors of the Norwich
Savings society and also from the
Chelsea Savings bank and United
Workers. Mr.. Williams is vice presi-
dent of the Chelsea Savings bank In
response to query from Mr.. Henney,
MIR. Leavens said he had not obtained
the views of the bank depositors.
No Reason for Change.
Frank L: Woodland, treasurer of the
Dime Savings bank and connected
it'll other banks and treasurer of the
William Backus hospital was asked by
Mr.. Higgins to tell Of the Backus hos
pital. Mr.. Woodland said he was rather
modest to do SO, especially in the pres
the proposed separation. The hospital
was endowed with a Slater fund of
100000 and Backus fund of $4,000.
The hospital is within the limits of
tricity and water is furnished by the
City. The charter of the hospital pro-
vides that all trustees be residents of
the town Of Norwich. Mr.. Higgins
read a vote passed by the executive
committee of the hospital in opposition
was opposed to any division and he
knew the people of Norwich were IA
vorably inclined towards the Ponemah
mills and would not like to have the
corporation leave the town. Mr.. Wood
ard was opposed to division or any
consolidation. There was no reason
why Norwich should not want to re-
main as Norwich. all of it. town and
city, just as at present.
General Opinion Against Any Change.
Charles D. Noyes in answer to
queries from Mr.. Higgins said he had
lived in Norwich forty six years, and
was director in Norwich Savings
society and president of The Bulletin
company, publishers of Norwich Bull
letfn, which was not quite as old as
the Hartford Courant. He believed
consolidation was detrimental to every
resident fthe town and that people in
all sections were opposed. He had
| held public positions and took great
pride in the Ponemah mills 1t is the
show place of the town and is pointed
| out with much pride as a leading in
| dustry Of the United States. The feel
| ing predominating is friendly to the
Ponenah mills among the whole peo-
pie. He did not believe the Ponemah
people wanted to get out of the town
| Of Norwich, but were annoyed by ir-
| responsible persons who occasionally
aimed at consolidation, but not in
| dorsed by the business men and al
| who had at heart the true interests OF
all Norwich. He said the delegation
represented the true interests of the
city of Norwich. MT Noyes was o,
the opinion that all who came on g
| special train to the hearing Of a weel
ago on the Board of Trade trair
had paid their own bills. He wa:
| opposed to separation and also to con.
solidation without the consent O.
| those concerned, and then not unit
| special consideration was given thu
Ponemah people who have so much in
terest. There is no desire on the par
| of Norwich to consolidate city ant
| town.
Howard L. Stanton, chief of tn,
Norwich Fire department, responded tt
| queries from MI. Shields. He sait
| the department represented a value O.
| R1oUpO"O, Will 6dIiUudl dppIOpfldtlOlS u
$4,000. The department is who'll!
supported by the city, but makes re-
Spouse to calls in all sections of tn,
town In eight years the department
apparatus crossed the city line 8;
times, thirty towards Yantic and thre,
| to TafeVille.
| Continued For a Week.
After the hearing had been on TO
three hours, some of the counsel ask
ed for adjournment to some other date
SO that members of the committee VIII,
desired t ocatch hone-bound train
might do so, and other parties inter
ested in the matter before the commit
tee might do likewise. The counse
opposed to separation stated that Their
was much more strong evidence t
present to the committee, and aske,
for another adjournment hearing. l
was finally decided to hold the fina
hearing next Tuesday afternoon at
o'clock
At that time more evidence is to b
produced by the opponents Of the bill
and this will be followed by the ar
guments.
| EgIAEPAIe