The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1874-10-31

cultural interests, II would unfav0raDly AZ
feet all the interests of the state.
Mr.. Norton of Bennington favored the
bill as one of political economy rather than
a subject for legislation,
Mr.. Henry Of Chester moved to amend
by striking out all of the first section ex-
cent the three first lines he favored his
amendment as relieving. tho. bill OF the OBJ
lection of fixing the legal vote at 8 per
cent, and allowing contract for any rate
stipulated in the note or contract.
Mr.. Grout of Barton was glad not to see
the usual number of legal gentlemen here
advocating higher rate of interest. Even
if we kill this bill, we shall have 1t before
us again in some FORM for this matter was
hydl a-headcd monster, from which, ii we
clip one head another would soon make its
appearance. Better kill this at once.
MIR. Henry of Chester said his amend
ment brought the question of an increased
rate of interest directly before the house,
and we should decide the question at once.
If we vote down this bill we only decide
the question of per cent, and tomorrow
we shall have another for Z per cent.
Mr.. Holden of Barre moved the bill and
amendments be dismissed, which motion
was agreed to by very decided vote.
From committee on claims, in favor of
S. 20, to pay Alex. Ketchum the sum
therein named; read third time and passed.
From committee on claims, in favor of
II. 144 to pay tue Bradford savings bank
and trust company, with proposals of
amendment fixing the sum of $47. II,
which was agreed to and the bill passed.
From committee of ways and means,
against II. 10, relating to the compensa-
ton of certain state employees.
Mr. Staulpv of spippetpr ,p0vp1 IN ampp1
so a. to take effect Dec. 1, 1874, and stated
that he offered this amendment so as not
to do injustice to the present messengers.
He was in favor of the bill because he
thought he had no right to take dollar
from the treasury of the state unjustly.
We can get plenty of boys at two dollars
per day, and so long as we can do so we
should pay them no more. Favoritism
should not enter into our deliberations at
ALL but we should do equal and exact jus
tice. He gave a statement of the number
now employed and the amount that it
would require if this bill should be passed.
Mr.. Hyde of Castleton said that although
there was law on the statute books in
1870 giving messengers SO per day; the
fact is they have always been paid the
same per diem as the members. They are
impartially distributed throughout ali parts
of the state, and he thought it very bad
| policy to attempt to adopt any new laws.
The committee had given the subject care
tul consideration, and were of the opinion
that the bill ought not to be adopted.
The amendment of Mr. Stanley was then
agreed to; ayes 20, nays 81.
Mr.. Davis of Reading moved that the
bill be dismissed, which was disagreed to ;
ayes 60, nays 90.
| Mr.. Henry of Chester moved that the bill
be ordered to lie and that the clerk be di-
rected to procure the printing of 300 copies.
MIR. Martin of Londonderry, opposed the
motion to lie; and thought we better meet
the question now.
Mr. Hyde of Castleton said, we are fix
ing the pay of the messengers for another
session, and for another body of men, and
as he saw many members were not voting
on the question, he called for the yeas and
nays on the passage of the bill.
Mr.. Smalley of Burlington, agreed with
the gentleman from Castleton, and thought
this was Ipicayune matter to be con-
sidered at this time. He preferred to let
the next legislature fix the compensation
of their own messengers if they wished to
change it.
Mr.. Bailey of Fairhaven briefly opposed
the bill, saying we were spending time that
| coSt tnc Slatc more llan all tnat VIII DE
saved by the bill
Mr.. Eddy of Jamaica and Mr.. King of
Lunenburgh briefly favored the bill.
On the question Of the third reading of
the bill, the yeas and nays were, ayes 115,
nays 90; so the bill was read the third time
and pas sed.
From special committee. consisting of
members from the county of Windham, in
favor of II. ITO repeating an act relating tc
the division of the town of Westminster
with proposal of amendment providing that
the bill shall not take effect until submitted
to vote of the people of the town OF
Westminster.
The amendment and the bill were dis
cussed by Mr.. Hubbard of Springfield, Mr.
Eddy of Jamaica, Mr.. davenport of Viii
mington, Mr.. Grout of Barton, Mr.. Martin
of Londonderry, Mr.. Smalley of Burling
ton, and Mr.. Davis of Reading, Mr. Bar
tholomew of Benson demanded the previ
GUS question, which demand was seconded
by the house.
The amendment proposed by the com
mittee was then agreed to; ayes 80, noes SO
The bill was then read the third time ant
passed.
On motion of Mr.. Slade, of Middlebury
adjourned.