Morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven [Conn.]) 1848-1894, 1884-04-02

TIE House was called to order at 10 o'clock by
Speaker Harrison. Prayer was offered by Chaplain
Stone.
Messrs. Conner of Milford Holistsr Of Windsor
and Judson Of Stratord were appointed as the COM
mittee the debenture bill.
business on the calendar was disposed Of fol-
lows:
against any town, city corporation or borough for
damages for injuries to persons or property here
written otce Ct such injury, the nature and cause
thereof, aad the time and place OF its occurrence
selectmsn OF such town, to the clerk Of such
city, corporation or borough All acts or parts OF
acts inconsistent are repealed.
Mr.. Hubbard. of Hartford, explained the necessity
for the bill. Mr.. Case, of Grady, argued strongly
head and might not be in his senReS again in week
GDder this bill he could not bring suit The present
waterbury suggested that the bill would the
nun.ber OF laWAuits and thus affect the lawyers He
hoped it would pass 1t should be required that suit
be brought while the defects exist and the city
thoritIss have chance to procure testimony on
ton Mr. Glover, of Fairfield, claimed there shoud
be objection to just lawsuits. Under the Dill fe "
ford argued against the bill as an unjust measure.
Persons because of neglect to remove snow
damages The bill was further discussed by Mes.rs
Talmacge of Bridgeport. etaub Of New MILFORD,
Range Of Gu1ford, and Mr.. Hubbard closed the de-
bate Arking that several good lawyers had en-
dorsed the bill ss a good The bill rejected.
Bill that when liquor licenses are revoked by tie
county commissioners appeal may be taken to the
Supreme court. Mr.. Range, Of Guilford, when the
bill under discussion several days sgo and tabled
offered an amendment that the license be ''inopsI-
alive during the pend ncy of the appeal"
Debate opened on this amendment. Mr. Ayers, of
Orange opposed any change of the law which, in his
opinion, was fair compromise between the saloon
men and the extreme prohibitionsts. The amend
nent is cat In the meal better let the decision of
the commissioners reVoking the ncerse stand until
a final decision is reached in the superior court.
Who are these men who asking relief? Saloon
keepers who are alwa, trying to evade the law and
who tax the wits of criminal lawyers to ind oopholes
out of which they may crawl when they detected
0VRd1DR W, Case, CRANKY.
amen dment practically destroyed the bill The orig
inal provided for appeals from all decisions but
the judiciary committee decided to confue them to
appeals from reVocations. Mr.. Case said that aft
consideration the bill been reported
he had become satish.d that it best change
the present law. He would vote against the bill aud
moved to indefinitely postpone. So ordered
The HouEe took up the bill providing for the of
disabled veterans in State hospitals State expense
The amendment of MIR. Weed, of New Canaan, that
the bill apply not only to Connecticut veterans, but
to those who enlisted in other states and were legal
residents of Connecticut at the time reconsid-
amend so that the bill apply to all 'honorably dis
charged" soldiers sailors marines who served from
dents of Connecticut at the time of enistmentl pro
vided that they must be residents of Connecticut
when applying for admission to the hospital. me
am ndment also gives s. 500 to Fitchs Home for Sol
diers at Darien Mr. Noble, of Bridgeport, objected
that the amendment did not cover men who served in
the not credited to any State who were
of Connecticut whsn they enlisted. The Glover
amendment adopted and the bill passed.
Bill that the railroad commissioners may order
change of grade crossing when unsafe, after due
hearing. not than half the cost to bs borne II
the city town. Grade crossings may be abolished
the rate CT annually on single track roads; as
many deemed necessary on double track roads
An arr endment offered by Mr.. Harrington, of Wind
ham yesterday was adopted. It authorizes the com
missioners to order road not to use tracks at
tI.ins; also to remove all switching and side tTacis
now laid across a highway. The railroad company
Law. Of New Haven, offered an smenduena
striking out all the original bill (above quoted and
leaving only the Harrington amendment. Mr.. Brain
Hartford. oDpCSsd this in the interest
of the people. Mr. Garvan,of East Hartford. 1f the
railroad COMMITTEES has reported any bill, that not
for the interests of the railroads, and is for the
benefit Of the people, then let as vote for it.. Mr.
ment was in the interests of the railroads. The
ans ndment was rejected and the bill Iassed.
Bin that no railroad company heretofore incorpo-
r.ted or biob shaiI hereafter be incorporated undr
general railroad laws of the State whose road has
MT been built its layout apI by she railroad
purposes without the consent OF those interest ed
therein, until the question wneIher d4h.oao 81 tne
public convenience and necessity to the citizens of
this St. shall have passed upon in its favor by the
railroad commissioners after reasonable Notice, by
publication otherwise to the parties interested to
appear and be heard in reference thereto.
Mr.. BraiIard, of Hartford. said that the bill had
been brought at the ms ance of Fairfield county
people, who annoyed by the new roads. Mr.. Law,
Of New Haven said that this bill worked more change
in railroad laws than any other offered this
1t practically repeats the general railroad law
ford to New York But it is a humbug; never pro-
to build Is only there to keep ether road
ECody
to build. But under this BILL the railroad comms-
sioners would have to cay that public convenience
law is the principle that the State needs all the
roads it get The more the better for the
cipe and contrary to the tenor of all the legislation
Of the past thirteen years Mr. Crofut, of Danbury,
purposes. GO ahead d. stroy valuable prop1Ey
Mr. Brainard of Hartford quoted the last report of
principle of the bin;s a mans property shoHld
not be taken for railroad purposes unless needed for
of Hartford characterized the reasoning of MT Law
correct. If both houses Of the legislature VIII
enact such laws a. those OF Massachusetts, (re-
ferring to tsshort haulA, then he wouId be will
ing to tabe the MaPsaC husetis report on this
manufacturing Mr.. Noble, Of Bridgeport, argued
against placing s-ch great powers into the hands Of
Better leave to individual capital to decide
road 10 nesded aud wi pay. The State cannot have
to railroad enterprises Mr. Cook, of Stamford, OPP
posed the bill preseL ting inRurmoHntable OBJ
to have been insigated by malice MIR. Brainaro, of
Hartford, said the committee had been ipu snced by
Representative from Fairfield county. Mr.. Glover,
of Fairfield said that he introduced the original bill
by request. The substitute bill reported from the
committee is in better shape yet he had grave doubts
ss that Of pubic eonvenience to the rsIrOsd eo
nissionsrs. Mr.. Caravan, of East Hartford, opposed
comforting upon three commissioners so important
question Its effect would bs to change the railroad
lobby from working on the House to working the
railroad commissioners
The Bin was rejected by an overwhelming vote
Bill amending the liquor law to saloons near
churches or echoos Also changing various sections
including one regarding prosecuting sgenis SO AZ
10 give them So extra for every successful prosecu
ton.
Mr.. Range, of Guilford, offered amendment that
licenses ay granted fer saloon withing 200 feet
of church or school. unless objected to by majori
ty OF the church meber school visitors; agreed
to. Mr.. Half, of st anington opposed any change of
the liquor lawip any way He thought the sentiment
OF the people was against any change, and moved to
indefinitely postpone the bill. Mr.. Range argued
that the changes proposed are wise. Mr.. Talmadge,