Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1895-03-15
represent viii commend you for 50 doing.

>~'SA~S
(Applause).
Mr.. Howe Of Milo, said that it was an
old saying to let well enough alone If
the people of this State were going back
ward in making their roads, there might
be some call for something to be done,
but in the last 10 years there has been
a great improvement in the making of
roads. They are improving year by year.
The State law obliges towns to make safe
and convenient roads, Would the ap-
polntment OF a commissioner be OF any
benefit? How much can the commits
soner do in saving expense to the towns
in directing what they shall haul into
the roads in the spring or haul cut in the
fall: The gentleman speaks of farms being
worth more on a main than on cross
road What power is this commissioner
g1ing to have to change a cross road to a
main road? The bill provides that the
commissioner shall have an office in the
State Capitol. He will have an Office
costing the State some $4,000 for the next
tgo years ard it will do no earthly good.
He may do some writing and send out
out some circulars This is not the time
that we want to invest $4,000 in this mat
ter / hope the motion to indefinitely
postpone will prevail Applause.
Mr. Haines moved that when the vote
is taken On the indefinite postponemeIt
of the bili that it be taken by the yeas
and nays.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr.. Jones of China, by unanimous
consent, spoke in favor of Indefinitely
postponing.
The roll was called, those in favor Of
indefinitely postponing the bin voting
yes.
YEA-Abbott, Babcock, Bagncll, Bailey of
Bodge. Boothby, Boynton, Brewer, Chase,
Chute, Clark of Hollis, Clark of Naples,
Comins, Cousens, Crockett. Daggett, Daigle,
hickey, Dole. Dudley, Drummer, Farrow,
Floyd, Folsom, Friend, Furbush, Geyer,
Gilbert OF Greene, Grindie, Crosse, Hapgood,
Hiscock, Houghton, Howe, Howes, Jones Of
China, King, Kngman, Lane, Law, Lawrence
of North Yarmouth, Leavitt, leighton, Libby
OF Chester, Libby Of Durham, Longley,
Mahoney, Millett, Milliken, Niles, Packard,
Peaslee of Jonesport, Pinkham, Plummer,
Reynolds, Rich, Richardson. Robinson, Ross,
Rowell, Sawyer of smitheld, Singer, Smith
of Hodgdon, Spear Of West Gardiner, Sprague,
Sweetser, league, Tibbetts, Tolman of Car
roll Tolman of Warren, Traitor, Weymouth.
NAY-Adams, Barton, Beedle, Berry, Bixby,
Briggs, Coffin, Cole. Doyle, Fairbanks, Far
Tington, Haines, Hamlin, Hill, Holbrook,
Hooper, Hurd, Hutchinson, Keegan, knowl-
ton, Larrabee, Lawrence of Lubec, Littleheld.
Mccullough, Merrill, Moore of Deering.
Moulton, Noble, Parkhurst, Parsons, Patten,
Smith of Dayton, Smell, Spear of Rockland,
Twitchell, WEIGH, Wells, Wheeler, Williams,
Winslow, Woodside.-45.
ABsENT-Bailey of Whitefeld, Bartlett,
Basford, Burns, Gates, Doten, Garner, Jen-
nings, Jewell, Jones of Rowland, Kane, Merry,
Miles. Miller, Moore of Gouldsboro, Peaslee
of Wiscasset, Rideout, Rodick, Rollins, San
born, Smith of Marion, Stanley, Whelden.
Wides.-2i
PAIREp-Gilbert of Canton, yes; Smith of
Hanover, no. White, no; Written, yes
On motion of Mr.. Haines of Waterville,
Adjourned.
Afternoon Session.
On motion of Mr. Patten of Bath, the
majority and minority reports OF the COM
mittee on shore fisheries relating to the
use of purse and drag seiucs in State
waters tabled pending acceptance of either
report. was taken from the table.
Mr. Patten Of Bath moved that the
minority report be substituted for the
majority report.
Mr.. Patten said that the bill which he
reported here simply carries us back to
fore '93. That legislation was just and
equitable at least. The law that is in
effect today is not just and equitable; ii
bears heavily upon one section of the
State. As it is today, there are one or
two sections of the coast that arc discrimi-
mated against. If this law is good law
it should apply to all of the coast alike.
There is no justice in saying that these
seincrs shall be allowed to catch up all
the fish on one section Of our coast and not
on another.
am opposed to this legislation as it
stands, today, first, beause it is discrini-
nation, and it is time that this Lcgisla-
turc stopped legislating for sectional in
forests. / was on the majority report on
the lobster measure, yesterday, and have
presented minority report, today, be-
cause they are both in the interest of pro-
lection, and | believe in protection. l be-
lieve, gentlemen, it is possible to depleto
the supply of fish on our coast. 1t is pos
sible to drive them away. The opponents
of this bill have said, let us alone, 70 harm
can be done They have also told us that
the seals in the Pacific ocean could not be
extcrminattd, but notwithstanding it is
an admitted fact today that the seals are
being exterrninated IL is just SO with
the fish on our coasts. You can drive the
food fish away from any section of the
coast. You can practically exterminatc
them. believe we should have protcc-
tive legislation. That is the second rea-
son why am opposed to the law as it
stands today.
a Then again it has been shown that it
was largely foreign capital and foreign
labor that was benefited by this special
change made in the law. 1t is the poor
fishermen Of Maine that ask for this pro-
lection today. Although they are com
paratively lew in numbers, their rights are
lust rs sacred as if they were numbered By
the ten thousands, and If you allow the
law to stand as it stands today, you will
discriminate against these DOOR fisher
mems II you want to take the position
thatsit can make no difference as to the
supply Of food fish what sort of legislation
YOU enact, well and good, but make it ap-
ply TO the entire coast line. That is the
only position that is equitable and just
Treat us down at the mouth Of the Ken
nebec river just as you treat those at the
mouth of the Penobscot river and other
sections of the coast Then only VIII
you be acting equitably and Just. CAP
plause.)
7 Il hot