The following is a letter to the editor of the Atticus City newspaper."Former Mayor Durant owes an apology to the city of Atticus. Both the damage to the River Bridge, which connects Atticus to Hartley, and the traffic problems we have long experienced on

In this editorial the author concludes that Mayor Durant has been responsible for the damage to the River Bridge and also for the traffic problems having been experienced on the bridge. To support this conclusion the author cites that these problems occurred during the past 20 years of Durant’s work and he should have approved a wider and better-designed bridge with the same expenses to avoid today damage to the bridge. The author also points out that despite the severe weather, River Bridge has deteriorated far more rapidly than the much longer Derby Bridge up the river. I find this conclusion specious on several grounds.

First, the author unfairly assumes that the damage of the River Bridge is merely Durant’s fault. Although this damage has happened during his 20 years work, there is no clear evidence to demonstrate that he has the absolute authority to disapprove the construction of the bridge or alter the design for a wider and more firm design. There might have been other people in authority responsible for such these failures in the design. Without considering and ruling out this and other possible reasons the author cannot substantially impute these flaws merely to Durant.

Second, even assuming that Durant has contently approved the construction with the current design, his approval might have been wisely for that time due to the limited accessible budget allocated by the government for the city. And it might have been worse if the populace has not possessed even this narrow bridge and they may face more commuting problems.

Third, it does not seem sensible to compare two different bridges which might have been constructed on distinct situations with different facilities and funds available for the Mayor. Derby Bridge, the longer and more firm bridge might have been constructed later than River Bridge while the Mayor has more fund and more proficient engineers. Or there is the possibility that regional situation of the Derby Bridge is different from the River Bridge and it carries much less traffic and has very better weather conditions.

In sum, the author fails to convince me that Durant was really responsible for the traffic and damages of the River Bridge. To bolster the conclusion he must point out other possible reasons and other administrators responsible for these failures. To better assess the strength of the argument I need more dear information about the allocated money, facilities and dexterous engineers to construction of Derby Bridge and the environmental conditions of Derby Bridge’s site.