The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1885-11-16
THE FERRY LANDING,
Arguments for the Remonstrants by
Judges Goddard and Symonds.
Concluding Arguments by Messrs.
CIeaves and Drummond.


The hearing was resumed Saturday morning at
nine o'clock
Judge Goddard made his argument, claiming
that the object of the remonstrants had been in
the hearing to introduce facts not opinions. He
said the city of Portland in it corporate capacity
| had remonstrateda against the laying out of the
! landing. To be sure 100 individuals and firms of
| the city had petitioned for it. He conceded that
the whole of Ferry Village and Willard is in favor
| of it. RemOnstrances have been presented from
ten towns representing outside of Portland and
Cape Elizabeth full 80 per cent of the population
and valuation. Outside of Portland and Cape Eli
Zabeth the names Of remonstrants outnumber
those of the petitioners to 1. He claimed that
all the prominent gentlemen and heavy taxpayers,
who have testified that in their opinion the land
ing ought TO be laid out more or less directly
personally interested in the plan, and expect
ing some pecuniaTy benefit or convenience to re-
suit to them from the landing. The Judge called
attention to the weighty testimony of the city
civil engineer and the loose sort of testimony of
the assessors of the city. He spoke of the wide
difference in the estimates of the cost of the work
The estimates of the petitioners are far too low.
The city civil engineer testified that he could not
advise the construction of a landing which in his
the city would have to be responsible. He asked
whether, if this landing is granted. the county
would be called upon to locate a landing on the
Cape side of the harbor. He called attention to
the exposed situation of the end of Portland Pier
southeast gale making it an unsafe place for
ferry boat to land.
Judge Symonds in his argument said he was
present by order OF the municipal officers to op-
pose the scheme. The city does not wish to repel
any closer communication between Portland and
Cape Elizabeth. Since the days of Mayor Butler
DraPficn n
public support to private interests If the ferry
does not pay as business operation why should
it not be abandoned? The ferry should stand In
precisely the same position as a railroad In other
cities it is not the practice of the municipal gov
eTnment topr0ylde landings for ferries. The ex-
pense should not be borne by the public but by
the private corporation. If this landing is laid
out it will be useless for the purposes of the ferry
company. If public landing located all steamers
or other craft In the harbor viii have right to
land there and the ferry cannot appropriate to its
exclusive use. He thought the bond of $4,000 to
secure the continuous operation of the ferry boat
is insufficient. He argued that the most favorable
report of the expenses and receipts of the ferry
boat shows that the line will not be self support
ing The commissioners cannot locate the land
ing unless they are satisfied that the continuous
running of the boat has been secured beyond a
reasonable doubt He claimed that even if the
proposed scheme would add to the public conven-
ience and necessity the large outlay would not be
justified.
During the latter part of the argument Judge
landing is laid out all vessels will have an equal
right to use it. vessel will have the right to
boat from landing place while so doing He
enlarged upon the necessary large expense of the
landing as computed by the city eivll engineer.
He criticised severely the action of the city as
SCISSORS in making examinations and estimates at
the request OF the petitioners when the city op
posing the petition. Their estimates too are
erroneous and very carelessly made He declared
that he did not intend to speak of the assessors
personally with disrepect but of their action and
Judgment in this matter he did not intend to
speak with respect. The judge argued that the
proposed landing will Immediately drive from the
w a Is OfQ
Chase g. Whitten and A. M. Smith & Co. win have
to move their business to some other wharf He
spoke OF the damage to the wharf corporation, He
thought the assessed valuation could not be
strictly used in making an estimate Of damages.
to be taken into account. All the work Of laying
out the present roadway has been paid for by
private owners. If the road is made public the
owners will have to be renunerated for the money
expended in its construction. No such necessity
as is claimed has been shown for the laying out of
feeling in this community that the boat now in
use is inadequate for the purpose and win prove
unsafe for heavy teams.
Hon. Henry B. Cleaves, in his opening argument
for the petitioners spoke of the necessity of hav-
run to Commercial street, but only to the harbor
commissioners line. The public convenience de-
mands that there should be a public highway into
tide waters. This highwap is not to benefit a pri-
yate corporation, but the public. The way will
be under the control of the city, and the city can
regulate the use of it by steamers One hundred
business firms of this city say that the public in
terest demands the location of this way. More
tages Of this way The counsel on the other side
have not found a witness to say that the public
convenience does not require the landing. Not
the city council, but simply the mayor and alder
men instructed the city solicitor to oppose the
landing. Judge Goddard and the other counsel
while pretending to represent country towns, are
really employed by rival ferry line. The remon-
stfantS claim that the landing will not be what is
wanted If the highway is laid out to suit the
convenience OF the public it will be what the peti
tioners want. All the counsel admit the public
convenience OF the landing, but they come for
ward in united effort for the benefit OF the wharf
owners, to enhance damages. The insinuatiOn
against the assessors that their action in this case
is unwarranted, is unjust. The assessors acted as
they did and came before the commissioners un-
der legal summons. The city civil engineer has
mad no experience IN Yaung property, and has
say the boat is not large enough. Public travel
will never be accommodated until there is high
way. In regard to the value of the wharf, tine as
sessed valuation has been for years S20,500. Mr..
Tukesbury says it is worth $4,000. Why did
not the other stockholders testify to the value of
the wharf? Why did the counsel not bring in the
books OF the corporation and show the dividends?
The books would not have shown per cent diyi-
Hon. j. ii. Drummond, in mis- argument for the
petitioners, claimed that ferry is not a private
does not pay for sustaining itself the towns are re-
quired toSupport it. This has been the law and
policy of the State for hundred years. rail-
road is an improved method of travelling but q
ferry must exist when any way exists at ALL One
is luxury and the other a necessity. 1t may be
doubtful whether the commissioners would have
authority to lay out this highway into tide waters
without special statute. 1t is time that Com
mercial street should be connected with the sea,
the great highway of nations. There are now
nothing but private ways leading into the harbOr
1t is admitted that this is necessity but il is OBJ
jected that now is not the time for it. When will
1t be time for it? They say this is not the place
All owners of wharf property will say the same
The petitioners ask for a highway on Portland
Pier and they leave the plan of the way to the
commissioners. The remonstrances to this high
way have only been obtained by the solicitation of
able attorneys without representation on the part
of the petitioners. Such remonstrances amount
to nothing He admitted that the cost of the
highway should be taken into account but
the public advantages should be set against
the cost. The witnesses who have testified are
personally interested in the landing it is true,
and that is Just the class of witnesses whose testi
mony is valuable. They have investigated the
matter and know what they are talking about.
He referred to the present difficulty of coTnmuni-
cation with Ferry Village. He called attention to
the large amount of travel on the ferry boat
during the past season. They say this is not
proper boat. The charter will look out for that,
when provides for proper boat To the obIec-
tlOn that the highway can be used by ali vessels
for dischargng eargOeS, it is answered that while
the vessels would have rights there they would
have to keep out of the way OF the Terry boat,
which would have the prior right according 10 the
statutes. In computing the damages TO the wharf
the rule of law is simple. what is II worth before
| the way is laid out? What is it worth after the
| way is laid out? The difference VIII be the dam
| ages Attention was called 70 the alleged errors
| OF the city civil engineer in computing damages
| and he defended the city assessors from the in
| sinuationthat had been thrown out against them
| afte O'Clock, the commissioners having been in
| continuous session for five hours. The papers
were submitted TO the commissioners and fhev
will make their decision later.