The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1884-11-05


Orleans Exposition; II. 100, an act TO pay e. |
ID. Fuller the sum therein named.
THE committees on agriculture of the |
senate and house sat together in the agricul- |
tural committee room on Wednesday and
Thursday afternoons and listened to re-
marks by Messrs. Atwood of Chittenden,
Smith of Stowe, Martin Of Marshfeld Has
seltine of Bristol Davis of Wocott, Quinlan
of Charlotte, Fish of Ira, Smith of Stock
bridge, Senator Cristy of johnson, and
other legislators, in regard to the utility OF
barb wire fencing. Mr.. Douglas of Whiting,
the chairman of the committee on the part
of the house, interrogated the speakers as to
their experience with the fencing. No one
gave an instance of an accident occurring
when the fence was properly constructed.
Nearly all the gentlemen said that the plac-
ing of a board or rail above the top strand
would tend to make the fence less useful,
inasmuch as stock would be more liable to
attempt to jump over the fence; and in leap
ing upon it they would break it and thus let
themselves down upon the wire The only
legislation which the committee will report,
If they report any, will be in regard to the
number of strands, the distance apart the
space between the posts-in short, what
legal barb wire fence shall be. Barb wire
fence has become largely in use in Vermont,
and its usefulness is so great that it will
never be discarded. After a full hearing in
1880, the committee reported in favor of its
use, and the legislature endorsed the report.
Since then its employment has increased six
fold in Vermont.
The joint special committee upon the bill to
| remove the shire of Orleans county came
| back Thursday from their trip to that section
| of the state. They visited Barton Landing,
| Newport, Irasburgh and Barton. At the
| two last places they had hearings, at which
| many citizens appeared. AT Newport, EN-
mons Raymond, president of the Passump-
sic railroad, c. A. Prouty, ESD, John
| Young, Esq, and others urged before the
committee the necessity of removal. At
Irasburgh Hon. James w. Simpson of
| Craftsbury, and Messrs Chaffee and Rowell
| of Albany, spoke against removal. Thurs
| day evening the committee gave public
| hearing in the judiciary committee room,
| largely attended by the friends and oppo-
| nents of the proposed law, which proved to
| be an interesting occasion. Judge Thompson
| of Irasburg and Wallace |. Robinson of Bar
| ton conducted the case in behalf of those
| opposed to change, while Major Grout OF
Derby and II. G. Wilson, Esq, of Troy
represented the other view. All the mem
bers of the legislature from Orleans county
and some outsiders, were examined on the
question, and the hearing was continued
until past midnight There is undoubtedly
a good deal of feeling in Orleans county
against the removal of the county building:
to Newport, although a majority of the
voters are disgusted with the accommoda
tions at Irasburgh. The people of Crafts
bury and Greensboro threaten that If New
port is made the shire town, they will asl
to be set off to Lamoile county, on the
| ground that Newport is so far away. |
this should be done, Orleans county woult
| lose one senator and Lamoille county woulC
| gain one. Barton Landing is making
strenuous effort to be the capital of tn
county 1t makes the two incontrovertibl
points that it is nearest the geographical
| center of the county of any village, and i
is also on the line of the railway. 1t i
claimed by both Irasburgh and Barto
Landing that the question of removal AM
location, if removal should be decided upon
should be left to the people of the county
, who are the most Interested OF anybody. !
curious phase of the whole controversy
the jealousy which Barton village exhibit
of Barton Landing. The leading inhabi
| ants of the village now oppose removal, a
, though they have in the past strenuousl
advocated it, because they are afraid tha
t the Landing may get the buildings.
THE senate and house railway committee!
sitting together in the senate chamber Thurs
: day evening, gave hearing on house bi
| | No. rs and senate bill No. 10. The formt
J was introduced by Mr.. Barrett of Rutlan
: and proposes to amend sec. 1881 of the Il,
l | vised Laws so as to permit a highway lal
| out after the building of a railway to GRO:
i such railway at grade. Governor Smith al
. | peared for the railways, objecting to I'll
v proposed amendment on the ground that
: would multiply grade crossings and great
/ increase the dangers of railway travel an
: expose the railways themselves to great lo
b from accidents at crossings. Grade eros
ngs are the most fruitful source of railws
n accidents and the greatest menace to raj
| way travel. G.. e. Lawrence, Esq. of Ru
= land appeared for the bill, arguing that IL
I | public convenience demanded the enaC
q ment of the bill. The measure seems to
% designed for local benefit. The facts cite
= | raised very serious doubts as to the wisdo
- of passing the bill Senator Holton spol
at length for the bill introduced by him co
e stitutng a railway commission. He gave u
= history of the origin in England, some for
+ years ago, of the provisions embodied in tn
L and all similar measures since adopted
s. this country, and argued that the propose
;, commission would work to the best good
j. both people and railways. Governor Smi
claimed that the state had already provid,
lie by various statutes for the sufficient regul
)r tion of the relations between the people al
e. the railways that they were in perfect a
ID cord that he did not know of case of dispu
" between the railways and the people; tn
ut there was, as there should be, a conmuni
IN of interests between them-the railwa
are public necessity and the people a
n. necessary to the support and profit
n the railways-and that a commission SUI
T. as the senate bill provides would tend to
G. disturbance of the existing mutual al
of friendly relations between the roads al
id their customers. lie explained now sol
rt of its provisions might work needless inju
d to railway, especially those requiring the
to show all their accounts, contracts, et
H. to the commissioners, exposing the roads
~ - the advantage rival railways might obta
10 10 from knowledge of the details of another
~ business, He further explained the impC
~ sibility of any such regulation or adju'
~ ment of rates as was demanded, and claim
~ ~ that the people of Vermont had cheap
p railway facilities than the inhabitants
40 40 any other state. A. +. Walker, Esq, spo
io for the bill, explaining its scope and e
pressing his anxiety for the enactment
d. this measure for the creation of better Il
~ derstandng between the railways and pc
Tn pie. He knew that what Governor Smi
lg had said about rates and alleged discril
ee ination in rates was true, but the people
VI not fully understand IT, and a full und'
IN standing in such disputed matters won
d. come out through commission and won
TO inure to the benefit of the railways as mu
as of the people A more direct, more e
IN peditious, way of investigating and decidi
IN matters between railways and people tn
IS the laws now provide-which are in ia
te dead letters-was desirable, He cited t
rn experience of Iowa and adduced newspap
I'd testimony TO show that a commission thei
n as well as in Massachusetts,, wrought gre
nd good to public and railways.
)n