Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1874-11-27

every dollar OF stock, OF BONDS, and otner
property in the State. He was aware that
there were great frauds in or grand lists,
and that they ought to be remedied. But
this was a step in the dark. He explained
at length the reasons which led him 10 the
conclusion that the bill was inadvisable.
The bill was further discussed by Senators
Howe. Walton, Wilson of Windsor, Roweli
and Parker.
On the question shall the bill be read the
third time, Senator Howe demanded the
yeas and nays. which were-yeas 5. nays
%. Senator's Brookins, Howe of Rutland,
Howe oi Windham. Rowell and Wyman.
voting in the affirmate, and Senators |
George. Henry and Reynolds absent. 30 |
the third reading of the bill was refused.
II. l22, an act to place the inmates OF IN
sane asylums under the protection OF the
laws was taken up, as q special order, ana
read third time. and on the question shall
the bin pass? Senator Howe of Windham,
said he opposed the bill, not from any
personal or selfish interest in the institution
at Brattleboro, for he had none ,pecunlary or
otherwise, but because he felt that the very
existence of 4 benetcient institution would
be sacrificed by the bill. he considered II a
violation Of the original charter OF the In
stitution, and thought it would not stand
the TEST OF Tue court. IL NeN oA-o NHN4AN--
unnecessary.
Senator Proctor. ae che of the committee
renorting in favor of the bill, said this bill
would place no obstacles in the way ct the
nresent management of tie institution,
which was good II would simply estab-
lish certain provisions which were IN the |
interest of humanity and to prevent EVIL
under a possible wrong management Inc
same law worked well in other States, and
would in this State.
Senators Ednunds and Chessmore briefly
expressed themselves rs opposed to the
bill.
Senator Ladd thought there was too much
machinery in the bill.
Senator Smith favored the bill.
Senator Proctor moved an amendment to
the bill, and that the bill be ordered to lle'
agreed to.
Senator Wilson of Windsor, moved to
instruct the Secretary to recall IRON the
House the resolution censurlng Henry
| Oviatt: agreed to.
HOUSE.
The Speaker laid before tie House com
municatiOn from the Governor, returning
II. III. to incorporate E. Il I. Fairbanks Il
Co., without his approval, and with his
reasons therefor The question recurring,
shall the bill pass notwithstanding the OBJ,
iections OF the Governor? the passage oil
the bill was refused-ayes 0, nays 1873.
The Governor, in his veto message, OBJ
iects to the provisions of the bill iorblddlng
the sale or transfer OF the stock, except on
attachment and execution. or by an admin
istrator, and forbidding the deylsing OF the
stock, if the corporation chooselto take II at
the valuation of the Probate Court, a
L. saf.1 p sha p rbfs NJ third ner-
sons. He considers the provision exempt
ing the stock from taxation still more oblec-
tionable lie says il the general law OF tax
alton i lust and proper he can see no rea-
son why any such special exemption should
be granted to this company. Such exempt
ion he considers unjust 70 other manuiac-
turing corporations and to other tax-pay-
ers. unwise, and establishing precedent OF
special legislation of dangerous and mis-
chievous tendency
SDccsaf order-u l3S, making provision
for regulating the rates for the transporta-
ton OF freight, passengers or cars on GER
tain railroads therein named was taken up,
the question being on the motion of Mr..
O'Brien of Searsburgh, 10 reconsider the
vote dismissing the bill.
Mr.. HYDE of Castieton. said the vote
dism5sing the bill was taken in thin
House. Mr. Hyde then reviewed the testl
mony as taken before the committee OF
railroads, showing that the rates charged
by the Delaware and Hudson Canal Com
pany for transportation OF slate and mar
BILE, over 4 short portion OF their road. II
this State. Is enormously higher than L
charged by the same company on that pOr
, ton of their road outside OF the State; anl
yerv much higher than is charged 10
similar distances over the roads of othe
. corporations in this State. lie said tina
unless the slate and marble interests of tn
! State can have some relief from the oppres
sions OF this foreign corporation, 1t vii
ruin these business interests IN the State.
Mr. Bailey of Fairhaven. said be wa
sent to this Legislature from the midst o
this controversy, and he dared not 20 bacl
to his constituents without raising his voic
: against the expressions of foreign mon
! | opoly. We have in his section q slate in
; terest that is valued at not less than 81,
500 600. which, if not oppressed By freigh
: charges 50 as to entirely ruin it, is capabl
: of beng developed to an almost unlimite
extent. lie thought the managers Of thi
railroad were mistaken in the policy the
! had adopted.
Mr.. Buell. OF Middleton IL was opposed t
singing out any one road on which to Fl
a tariff of freights. If We will reconside
the vote, he would like to offer an amend
ment to relieve the bill Of the objection q
special legislation.
: Mr. LAID of Alburgb opposed the motto
/ to reconsider, as he was opposed to sue
, | special legislation, and be thought Their
was no need of any such bill as this.
Mr.. Batchelder Of Arlington, was oppose
| to special legislation in regard to anv raj
!, road in this State, and he should oppose tn
motion to reconsider for the same reaso
, that he voted to dismiss. lie would favor
, general law to regulate the tariff on a
railroads, but could not vote for this bill.
, Mr.. MunsOn of Manchester, said that
understands that the tariffs now charged b
the Delaware and Hudson Canal Company
! are lower than those charged by othe
: roads, and hence there was no necessity 70
any legislation in regard to this corpora
ton. lie must, therefore, vote against re
, considering the vote.
! Mr.. Reed of Pawlet said that as a farmer
ne was opposed to this bill, for he believet
that it would react 10 the detriment of tn
farming interests.
! Mr.. Davenport Of Wilmington. preferre,
general legislation to special; and if tn
motion to reconsider can be reconsidered
i and the bill be made general in its applica
ton he should be pleased TO support it
, Mr.. GrOut of Barton. said he, as mem
, Der Of the committee did not find the fact
in regard to the Delaware and Hudson
, Canal Company, to be as stated by Mr.
Munson.
Mr.. Smalley OF Burlington, said this bill
stands simply in this position here is
complaint of oppression from certain in
terests on the Delaware and Hudson Cana
Company's road, and the facts do not sub
stantlate the complaint and if it did, h,
did not believe we have the power TO remed
the evil complained of.
, Mr. Ladd of Alburgh. demanded the pre-
yious question, which was seconded by tn
House The question then REQUIRED, shal
the vote dISmissing the bill be recOnsidered
Mr.. Bailey Of Fairhaven demanded the yea
and nays. which were ia ken ayes -. nay
l46. 81 the motion to reconsider was Dis
agreed 10.
AFTERy DON.
From general comm ittee in favor Of II
334, to increase the b )unty for destruction
of bears.
Mr.. Churchill of Goshen. favored tn
passage of the bill IAN stated the necessity
of some protection to the sheep breeder
of the State against the depredations o
bears
Mr.. Daniorth of Bar, ard. humorously ia
vOred the bill, citing one or two rathe
ludicrous scenes that had come under biz
own observation. which to him demonstrates
the necessity of some further protection
against bears
The bill was then read the third time anC
passed.
Mr. Walston of Williston, moved to re-
consider the vote dism issing II. 42a, for the
establishment of public town, city and vii.
lage libraries; which was disagreed to.
Special Orders. SO, to pay Julian Scott
the sum therein named, was taken up, I he
| question being on the third reading of til c
bill.
Mr.. Danforth of Barnard, favored the
bill.
Mr. Bailey of Fairhaven sent to the clerk :
desk letter from Mr.. Thomas W. Wood,
the artist, to Mr.. Scott, in which he said
81 am satisfied that the battle of Cedar