Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1857-02-27

and Rutland are now favored with facilities for
business and growth. and with o share. Bur-
lingtOn with a very large share. of public in
sututions and in the spirit of generous and
manly sentiments they should say. let Mont
peier have her share, or, if the capital is to
be removed let it go TO some other village
which enjoys none of these iayors. lie would
have them yield the capital to Montpelier
and he hoped it would be fixed there forever
Mr. Howard. of Danville, quoted an apt
distich from Burns, to hit off the statements
of gentlemen whose interests have got the
advantage of their Judgments One element
brought in here would have no influence upon
his mind-that is, who will give the most for
the house. Vermont should build and own
her own house it should be the property of
the people, in which every taxpayer shall
have an interest. Where then. shall the
house be In sos the Capital was fixed at
Montpelier In lS26 the question was fully
canvassed in the Legislature, by Mr. Bailey
/ of Burlington. and Temple of Rutland. in
favor of removal and by ID. A. A. Buck and
James Bell against removal and the Legis-
iaturo decided against removal. Again. the
attempt 60 remove was made in 1892 and
failed again From these facts, tho gentle
man from Burlington argued that this was an
| J.
facts as evidence that the State had dotermin-
ed to fix the Capital at Montpelier it was a
settled queshon--settlod by the representa-
tiycs Of the people three times it is not an
open question. Has anything occurred TO
change the propricty of this settlement of the
question, lie argued not. by statistics
showing that now, as at previous times the
demands of the population require Montpel-
Ter as the placo lie would not disregard
this accommodation Of majority of the poo-
pie for the purpose Of gratifying the pride or
the ambition of any village. however beauti-
full. The question Of mileage he regarded as
comparatively unimportant, and moreover as
a question which cannot be decided under the
contradictory testimony hcrc--it must be
decided by the cOmmon-scnse of the meme
oers. That, lac thought pointed TO Montpol-
Ter The question of property to be sacri-
feed by removal was more important and at
Montpelier, as all agreed, there is "a large
propcrty-some say 100000 for repairs
others say 100000 for rebuilding. Hore
then was one palpable and important fact
remove the Capital, and the State sacrifices
almost the whole of this property-lor every
body can see that the act of removal leaves
the property valuecss. except the compare
lively tuhing value of the land As to milo
age of the members; Bellows Falls could
accommodate the members as well as any
wherc-tor members will ride in the cars, and
be paid for it by the State Not so with the
people they viii come to the cheapest point.
and that is Montpelier, now. as it ever has
been With these views. and I'm reference
also to the injury 20 Montpelier and the obi
cations of the State, he was for Montpclicr
As TO the resolution it provides for repair
ing or rebuilding. This he would leave TO a
committee to be appointed for tho purpose.
The Committee rose and had leave to sit
again at half past ten on Monday morning.
The Committee on the credentials of Mr.
.lmwood of Rupert, reported the facts of the
icath of Mr.. DEMO, the representative elect
ID last September, and Of the election of Mr..
iarwood few days since; that two similar
asses had occurred in which the decisions
we're contradictory, and that provision should
e made by law for such cases. The Com
littee reported resolution that it is
noxpedient to admit Mr.. Harwood
Mr. Spencer submitted a minority report
greoing to the facts reported by the majority.
Tut regarding representation as fuudamon-
al and constitutional right of the towns. and
hat in Difference TO this right Mr. HAYWOOD
should be admitted to a seat, although his
'lechon was not lawful.
Mr.. Green of Waterbury raised the oucs-
ion Of order. whether the House can net ON
.bis question undor tbe rulo
The Speaker did not sustain the n,ipt
Mr. Allen of Pawlet moved 40 law tbe rc-
ports ON tbo tablo and mint f,c,n
Mr. Colby objected to the printing.
Mr.. Kittredre thought the question om-
braced in the reports IS am importort ono
question whether the town of Rupert cannot
supply the omission in the Constitution and
the Statute as to cases of this kind. Uc
would consider the case and print fine ro,,rts
so as to give opportunity for deliberate con-
sdcration
Mr.. Colby thouqht il was impropcr for R,,.
pert to send representative here and i'm
proper for the House ia consider II. Inf Ri
gentlemen wished to debate IT, he would
his objection to priptipo
MIR. ALIENS nation was a.,roodt, -5t,cs
Adionrpod
Afo>n,y M 90
SENATE
D.
w. N.Y. oy '''o Nn'P'uh;
'O """I "''ihS WIlNeu loI inc senate 70