Greenbrier independent. [volume] (Lewisburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1980, 1922-05-26

State of the Chic and Kentucky
borders. and also finish links in an
important highway cross the State
tt"m Ohio to tLc State of Virginia.
so much for the question of pol
icy and authority as TO our advo-
cacy of the Midland Trail over the
route originally proposed and in
opposition TO amy departure from
that ruutc.
1.-The Atlantic-Pacitic highway
Was first brougt 10 our attention on
August s. 1921. in tine shape Of Il
letter from II. T.. Matthew's. Sccrc-
tary of the Huntington chalnbcr Of
commerce. to T.. l.. Adams. Sccrc-
AIRY of the irontou chamber of COM
nrrce. and which outlined a ma
tinnal highway which. as far as
Ohio is concerned, should run on
ti:c north side of the Ohio river
from Cincinnati to Ironton. Ohio,
and which asked our cooperation
IN this matter. On this occasion
Mr.. Matthew's, Of Huntington. asked
us the following question: Would
YOU be willing TO join us. using YOUR
efforts to get those Interested be
tween Charleston and Hinton. woul
YOU attend 4 conference to be held
in the early fall between Represent
tatircS of I.cwiSburY. Hinton. Iron
on. Portsmouth. Cincinnati and the
Atlantic Pacific highway aSSocia--
toni
"tnhcv date Of August 10. 1921.
and by authority Of the good roads
committee of the Charleston CHAM
Der OF commerce. and by the furth-
cr authority of the board of dircc-
tors Of the Charleston chamber Of
commerce, the following letter was
addressed to the Huntington cham
Der OF commerce, huntington. W. Va
'Gentlcmcn Replying to your
letter of Angus 9th, enclosing COPY
Of your letter Of August 9th to Mr..
l.. b. Adams. Ironton chamber of
commerce. lronon. Ohio, beg to adj
wise that the Charleston chamber of
commerce will be glad to cooper
ate viii YOU at any conference held
nj huntington in reference to the
ell nrt> for the Atlantic Pacific high
way across the State. In agreeing
TO this conference we are assum-
ing that the Stale will follow the
lines of the Midland Trail or The
kanawha and james River turn,
pike. which extends from Hunting.
ton 10 Charleston. across and alon.
the north bank Of the great Kant,
| wha river from Charleston to
Gauiry bridge and thence by WAY OF
.\nstrad. lcwisburS. White Sulphur
Springs to the Virginia line.
"Thc Charleston chamber Of com
mcrce has been in favor of this
route for many years and has con.
tribute quite Il good deal toward
its partial completion as it now
stands. and it is still working to this
end.
Our good roads committee also
asks me to say that they are hearth.
~ in favor of the route as proposed
from Cincinnati to Huntington and
will be glad to work for those in.
ltcrest.
The Huntington chamber OF
commerce acknowledged receipt OF
this letter. and under date of Angus,
l3 the Charleston chamber Of com.
mercc replied further to Mr.. Math,
ewS. as follows:
| 'Neplyipg further to your letter
70 August 1!h. We beg to advise thai
tlIc position Of The Charleston
chamber Of commerce. AS always
been that the Kanawha and James
ihVtr turnpike and its route i'm this
"nd OF The State should 90 BY way
OF Gaul"N bridge. AnSlcad. Lookout
ana White Sulphur. This policy of
our local chamber should not be
confused with the contention of the
itlnton chamber Of commerce for
another route. which is presumed
o go by way of Becklcy, Hinon. Al
dcrSon and thence to White Sui
Fhlr. We are in favor of both
routes. but prefer to see the route
iirSt designated completed first.
"On December .. 1921, the Hunt
inSton chamber of commerce noti-
lied lis by telephone hat MIR. II. A.
Russell. Of the Atlantic Pacific High
way association Of Fort Scott, Kan,
was on his way to Charleston and
asked that we give him the courtesy
Of meeting with our duly consti--
tutcd road committee. A meeting