Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1881-02-14
Mr.. Halls Speech.
Continued from fret page-)


per cent. We are economically managed,
for orr running expenses are only eight mills
and two-tenths of mill: and vet BY reason
of the pavmeat of the interest on these bonds
our taxation Is three per cent It Is owing 10
that taxation. unquestionably, that the cltl-
zens of this ward feel "a ih1ngh they needed
some sort of relief Il is on account OF
the pavment of the interest of that debt and
the little portion Of the main debt that we
undertake TO paw each year By taxation,
amounting TO about - .oGb, that makes our
taxes 50 grieyou-. and vet as honorable men,
aupeal 10 Won II we can avoid IL. gentle
men? Would it be right for u to pass our
interest, and not raise the money to pay It.
tell YOU that the gentlemen OF ward =
would resist that much as we should down
town. They are honorable men. Now from
the weight Of that taxation, they undoubtedly
measure Of relief in this act
of the citv But as the gentleman has wei
said. If YOU favor that portion by giving re-
lief 10 them do you not add an additional
burden TO the poor men of the city proper.
That is so logically and SO luci1ly put. that
i, is unnecessary for me to descant upon the
statement
Now. gentlemen. we owe this debt; and il
il to the effect Of this bill upon that debt that
I wish to call your attention and the atten-
ton Of the lawyers of this House. They say
that they have provided in the bill for the
absolute security of this debt. | say they
have not: ard | shall undertake to convince
thi- House that they have not.
The bonded debt of Rockland is a corpor-
ate debt the bonds are under tie hand and
seal of the corporation through its officers.
The only absolute security for thar debt is
the power ofthe city to tax its citizens.
do not controvert the doctrine recognized in
North Yarmouth VS.. Skllings. ij Me-, 1913,
and Hampshire vs.. Franklin, Is Mass. Sc,
that the Legislature has the poieer TO impose
obligatioas on fopns. II is the remedy that
is defective.
II has been urged with some apparent
plausibiitv that the new town, if set off, can
not escape its liability to paw its portion OF
the debt if she would, that it is in effect a
mortgage. Il lien upon its territory. The
fallacv of this statement is apparent to every
LAWYER of this house Under the statutes OF
this State Il judgment against a town may
be levied on the estates of the Inhabitants
rithin the torn Nobody will contend
for moment that any portion of a town set
off can be holden to satisfy debt against the
parent town. II man holds de5t against
Rockland he sues Rockland. not West Rock
land he obtains his judgment against Rock
land. not West Rockland. If then not paid
can he levy his judgment on the property Of
the citizens of West Rocklanl. another
town? The proposition is simply absurd.
Rockland must take care of that whole debt,
every dollar of it. The bill is framed ON
that theory. 1t Acknowledges that the city
must pay il all. and then. after paving, seek
such remedies the bill provides, 10 he re-
imhursed for the part belonging to West
Rockland to paw.
Where and in what manner shall the rem
edy be applied? We say it can only be
through the power of tavation which must be
retained in the city of Rockland.
This doctrine has been recognized by this
Legislature in the division of towns. The
town of Frankfort was divided in 1867. Ii
owed small debt. The part set of was in
corporated as the iowa of Winterport. Its
part of the debt was hut the small sum OF
about SlJ 000. Yet the difficulty the i'm
prac,icablitv of enforcing the payment of it
against Wintcrport after Frankfort should
have paid il. was seen and the security provi-
ded for in this way.-the power to tax that
portion set Off to pay its portion of the debt
was retained by the act in the parent town.
And the court say in the case of Vosc vs..
Frankfort 81. Me. 234. litigation which grew
out of the division BY provisions of the
act the taxpayers set off remain part of the
town for the assessment of taxes, with the
same rights and liabilities the remaining
citizens in relation to these debts" But this
in not the only case in which the doctrine for
which contend is recognized. \ part Of
Manchester was set off and joined to Hal
lowell IN 1870. By the act the part set of
was to paw three per cent. of the debt of ttt
town of Manchester. and the power to asses
and collect the taxes of the part set off wa
retained in the parent town, till the debt wa.
paid This was done that creditors of :he
town and the town itself should lose none
of their security, that all remedies of the
creditors should he preserved. Otherwise
the division would have been n violation o
that clause of our constitution which prohib
its the Legislature to pass any law impairln-
the obligations of a contract. ThiS'principl,
no lawyer will question. This is not the
place for the citation of authorities. but may
he hardened fer citing a recent decision o
the L. s. Circuit Court. for the District o
Wisconsin. taken from the Reporter, n law
journal In an action against town on
81 200 bond. where the remedy had been i'm
paired hv act of Legislature. the court saw
s.Anv change in the remedy which PRACTICAL,
cuts off a portion of the cause of action ol
renders the contract N less droii1bie north
is as much within the constitutional prohihi
ton as a law which strikes directly at the
contract itself" Burton vs.. Town of kosh
konong.
This bill provides for division, and di
rectlv renders tie security of the creditors o.
Rockland s'of less available worth bv plac
ing beyond their reach, about $500, 900 wortl
of real estate. which was part of their So
curitv when the contract was made. This
principle was recognized BY this legislature
in the division of Orono. The part set of
formed Oldtown. The debt was small. but
the legislation provided for the full preserva
ton of the contract with the creditor nv
clause empowering him To- sue either or bot
forms.
II is significant fact. that m instance Of
the dividing of a city owing large bonde.
debt can be found in the books. With four
years of preparation and trial. with this finan
cial problem standing across their track
with many eminent lawyers in their employ
| not onet 1t is bold. uncommon. nav almost
unprecedented act of legislature, to divide a
city owing n large bonded debr.
| But the doctrine. that the property of the
| individual is holden at all. is under lien 10
paw the debt. even in the town against
which the debt was contracted. is well nigh
demolished by the recent decision OF
the Supreme Court of the United States. in
the Memphis case. When the court saw
/ Tho doctrine Of Snp,a nf tb, S,,.as ,b,, -;