The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1915-10-06
BEDDING REMAINS
 COP. AND VOTES
 CONTRACT SYSTEM
Members of New Road Com. mission Are FIX -Selectmen
 With One Exception.

getting out more or the GeOrSetOWn
 shop vote than usual the Republicans
 were able to slightly increase their
 majority at Mondays election over
 that of last year. On candidates for
 the principal offices the vote was as follows: Selectmen-S. H. Osborn, r, I157; Zalrnon Read, r, 137; M. Joseph d, 98.
 l Assessor, E. A. Pinkney, r, 136; J.
 L. Blacknan, d, 11O.
 l j Town treasurer, w. H. Hill, r, 148;
 William A. Lounsbury, d, 93.
 i Board of relief, M. D. Sanford, r,
 ford, d, 100; Robert H. Rider, d, 162. Town clerk, J. B. Sanford, d, 234, l (was on both tickets).
 The road question occupied most Eof the time of the business session.
 Having tried about every other way
 it was decided after a discussion last 1 ing nearly two hours to determine by
 the test of experience what virtue
 there is in the single contract system. tC. H. Plump led off by presenting
 resolution expressing the conclusions reached by the citizens meeting of i Sept. 24. It provided for the creation lof a commission of five who should
 be empowered to arrange for the care and maintenance of the roads and
 bridges under the single contract sys- tenn, the contract to run for three years. The contractor must furnish l a bond for the faithful performance l5of his duties and to insure the town against loss through non-perforn- ance. Any surplus which may re- main from the appropriation after the contractor is paid shall be expended 1 by the commission and se1ectmen in work of the nature of permanent inn provements.
 | r77.- ton, said our road question of today could not be compared with the same question of ten years ago because of the changed conditions of traffic. The public was earnestly desirous of inn
 provement, but felt that many oppor- tunities for realizing improvement had been neglected. An offer by Com ago to furnish without expense to the town, the services of an engineer to undertake a quest for gravel deposits
 had apparently been ignored. So had 1.-the offer of citizens to contribute to-i wards paying for betterments in their Irrespective localities. He was pro- Iceeding to relate specific instances. re-
 ported to him of wastefuIS and ir1ef- ficient management when ex-SeTect-
 man Charles Sanford protested on the ground that it was hearsay evidence land therefore not admissible. MT. l. Iyear 1916 we should not try to handle the road problem by 1861 methods. l.. O. Peck, Se1ectman Barnes and Is. C. Shaw opposed the resolution be- Icause it seemed to them impossible 1 to draw enforceable specifications (which wouldf. f.. meet the needs of the town. MT. Barnes thought 1t even doubtful if bids would be forthcoming owing to the risks the contractor must assume from the clements. If there were bidders they must calculate on 9 margin for profit or comprehension for their own services so that the to- tai would probably amount to more with results probably less satisfactory, II1oyd B1ack1nan advocated the con tract plan although both he and MT. Shaw expressed a preference for the supervisor system agreeing, however, that it was not feasible until the town largely increased its road appropria.- ton.
 The most effective plea for the new
 plan was made by ID. s. Sanford. He believed that many of the objections Iraised were fanciful and that the ex-
 pertinent proposed was we'll worth
 trying although he also was a firm believer in the supervisor method which in it's brief trial had admitted ly accomplished good. In general the improvements so far gained were the
 result of agitation and it would not do to allow matters to remain sta.-
 tionary. Others who spoke in support of the contract. system were B. A.
 Pinl1ney and J. L. B1ackman.
 w. A Lounsbury told a diverting story about an experience of the town
 under the pieceneaI contract system of former years. The supervisors re-
 fused to pay one man's bill on the ground that he had failed to keep his
 section in aiT-
 tractor sued and won his case largely by the aid of citizens who had pre-
 viously complained of his neglect, but who went into court and swore that
 the road was never in better condition
 than while under his care. sfYes,'' added the man in the next chair,
 aand the best part of the joke was that the contractor had done no work whatever on the road.''> A man a few chairs further on dissented from MT. #Lounsbury's conclusion that the in stance proved the contract in question to be worthless. 4sThe town lost '' said he, mot on the merits of the case but because certain citizens falsified themselves under oath. Such a case could not occur now because we have now no citizens who would thus per jure themselves E. When it came to a note on the res- o1ution it was necessary to divide the house. A count showed 57 for and | 39 against. Members of the newly 1 created commission were then elected | by ballot, upon the report of a norni- ] mating committee, as follows: B. B. Banks, w. c. Sanford, Lloyd Black man, Eugene Adams, Charles H. | Plump. All except the last named | are former se1ectnen.
 The meeting voted a road appropri- | ation of $6,OOo, although this year the l roads and bridges cost nearly $7.OoO. | For schools there was appropriated | $6,0O0, the same last year, and to 1 this was added special appropriation | of $2o0 for teaching vocal music! This | will be a new feature in the schools | g. cross road about 1000 feet long in | GeorgetoMn previously owned hv nri-