Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1886-11-19


| lows were almost unanimous auaiust Ill
vision Ncl~iire had had rNurrirnCr IN
the prosperity that depends upon the con
! tiuuauce of some Great munopOllcs. Gov
| pocJIr's day was sure to come, and he
I'll 'erstood thai the day Of marble was
sure to come He opposed the division of
| Rutland, but thought II the bill
did pass, it ought to pass with the
amendment. Mr.. Butteriield thought that
personal consideration ought not to
enter into the question, ana said that he
WIS in favor of the sepal alton of Proctor
| from the towns of pttsford and Rutland
| Pittsford did not object to the change.
The case might be different If Proctor lay
only in Rutland. Mr. Marsh said that he
believed III following the safe line Of pre-
cedent, which was against leaving the
question to the voters of the town pro-
posed to be divided. He argued I'm favor
of the passage of the bill Mr.. Kingsley
said he held neutral" position. He had
not decided which side was right, but he
should oppose the bill so as to let the
two localities wait until they could come
to the Legislature agreed on some plan
| for an adjustment of their difficulties.
| Mr.. ChesmOre defended the position
of the committee against the slaud-
ers of the Rutland Express which
had been read to the. House by Mr..
Goodell further favored the bill and OPP
| posed the amendment. Mr.. DennisOn of
| Pittsford said he and his town were in
favor of allowing Proctor to he set off as n
separate town. Mr.. Wall opposed the bill
and reviewed in detail the arguments of
the petitioners and the answers of the
opponents of division. Mr.. Poland said
that he had no objection on constitutional
| grounds to offer either for or against the
proposed amendment, and he thought that
| If the House were satisfied that certain
business interests in Rutland would
Ida 1. la
favor of the amendment. But he had
something to say on the main question.
| There was something naturally repugnant
| in the ACKNOWLEDGMENT o. an old town
like Rutland, and he should be OPP
posed to it until he was shown
| that there were good reasons
for division. He understood the geo
graphy OF the town of Rutland and had
| understood 1t for nearly 40 years. SIX
years ago the town applied for II city char
Ter, but under the leadership of the man
who is now the prime mover of division,
| the application was refused. He did not
| think 1t wise to incorporate a town the
| representative of which town would be
only the representative of one man or one
corporation. Mr.. Simonds said that Gov.
Proctor's opposition to Il city charter six
years ago arose from his belief that it
would be unfair and unjust to the villages
outside of Rutland Mr., Peck said that
while the proposed division would take
away one-siXth of the territory of
Rutland it would take away one
twelfth of the grand list Mr.
Mansur explained the position of the
committee and the manner in which their
Investigations were made, and showed the
reasons which led the committee to their
conclusions. Mr.. Hogan said that less
| than 300 voters of Rutland would vote for
a division and he thought it ought to be
referred to the voters of the town. Mr.
Bedard opposed the referring the matter
to the town. He thought the Legislators
were here to decide such matters and
ought to be willing to meet the question
themselves. On motion of Mr.. Flagg the
previous question was ordered by the
House. Mr. Hogan demanded the yeas
and nays. The amendment was then dis
agreed to by a vote of 81 to 1874. Mr.. Smith
of Nershire moved an adjournment which
was disagreed to. The bill was then or
dered to Il third reading aud was read.
The bill was then passed by IL vote of l2S
to 90.
ORANGE COUNTY HEARING.
The hearing last evening on the ques-
ton of removing the shire of Orange coun.
ty from Chelsea was attended by II large
number of interested parties j. X. Oar
ling testified that Chelsea had good
hotel, but that it was badly kept. lie
preferred to leave the whole matter to Il
vote of the people of the county. J. H..
Watson said that only 1912 voters out of
the 5000 opposed the change. Ten towns
would be better accommodated. Plymon
Seaver spoke in favor of allowing the mat
ter to remain as at present A large ma
JOrty of the committee would be III favor
of the change if it were not for the large
expense AS the committee, with the eX-
ceptiOn of Mr. Stearns and Lombard and
possibly one other, are opposed to a
change, it seems evident that none VIII be
recommended.
HEARING ON THE LICENSE BILLS.
A hearing on the Currier and Laird
sentative Knapp of Middlebury said that
though considerable friction has attended
the execution of the existing law, it has
driven the liquor traffic under the side
walks and into holes There is less drunk
enness here than in the license States. 1t
! is generally conceded that with our law,
| the temperance cause has made great
progress. 1t is not IA perfect success but
in our small towns there is little or no sale
Of liquor. If we have a license law it will
| then be sold openly and freely, and every
man who exposes liquor for sale in its at
! tlactNe forms Is corruptOr of youth.
| The same trouble would exist in the small
| towns under a license law rs now exists in
the larger towns under the pr1hibtory
| } wv. In the latter there would perhaps he
| fewer To sell but they will sell more. We
! have no right to license a wrong aud the
| people are not prepared TO say that you
| have Il right to make criminals and pau
| pers. The republican party Is under obi
! CATION to sustain the prOhibitOry principle,
which is right in the sight of God
Mr.. Laird thought a stringent license
law would shut up thirty or forty of the
places which are now selling III Mont
pelier. lie thought there was more illegal
selling than is generally supposed and
that The present law is Il dead letter. The
/ question was tree rum Us II is, or have ii
sold under some restriction. He did not
think the boys would be 80 apt to form
habits Of drinking if the liquor was sold
openly as when sold secretly.
Mr. Curricr sand as to the licensing of
the liquor traffic, Vermont had been in the
| business over thirty years-turnlshing the
/ capital and the rum and 24l agents to do
the business. There were 10000 dozen
bottles of lager beer brought into the State
l.. 4 IL 4