Daily Kennebec journal., 1899-02-17
e that the people have. right % can a

me that the people have right to call
halt
We have seen the appropriations tha
have been proposed at this present ses
sion. II we go on In this way to the en-
OF this session, we shall find ourselves II
debt up to our constitutional limit, am
the rate OF taxation will again NECESSARILY
be increased to somewhere from !. to 81
mills. Now this is not a pleasant pictur
TO contemplate. but l submit to m.
brother senator's whether 1t is not tru
one. The distinguished senator fron
Aroostook has suggested that this il
making great deal of fuss over iittl,
matter. calling simply for an appropria
tion Of $4,000. but, brother senators. this II
not the meat Of the cocoanut.
! have no more doubt that nine out o.
every ten of the voters of this State ar,
opposed to this increase than / have o
any geOmetrical demonstration. Theil
conversation shows 1t; their letters show
1t, and their petitions rain down upon Il.
by dozens and scores and hundreds. show
ing it. They know that they are com
PEELED to practice the strictest economy
at this time and they simply ask tina,
those holding high positions practice Z
little of the general self-deniai; and be
iieve that when the judges themselve,
come to consider all the evidence in tho
themselves will be willing and glad Il
grant the prayer of the petitioners.
MR.. GRINDLE OF HANCOCK
Mr.. Grindle of Hancock, ssiid:
MIR. President and Gentlemen of ths
Senate:
l rise to speak briefly in explanation pi
my views relative to the measure unde,
consideration. wish to say sincere.,
that no man has more respect or admira.
tion for our juages than / have, but be.
fore voting for this measure | want to
see the responsibility fixed where 1t be-
longs. Certainly the movement to rails.
their salaries did not originate in the air
and where did 1t come from?
Did the judges themselves start It:
Have they ever complained that their nav
is Inadequate: Are they saying that they
are getting less than they could. earn
working for clients? Or did the move.
ment originate with some promising
young lawyers who are prospective can.
didates for the Bench?. Without amy dis.
courtesy to such. must say that their
interest is not entirely a public one. Oh
did it originate with persons who hav,
no personal interest and who are well dis.
posed but a little too ofiicious: These arr
important questions on which want in
formation.
Now | believe that | correctly state tila
sentiment of my constituents when | say
that the most valuable service that the
members of this Legislature can render 10
the people is to oppose all schemes or
measures which will increase the expense
of State government. For while there is
not in sight a single measure which will
lessen expense, there are many which
will increase it. And unless something Is
done to defeat them 1t Is certain that they
will entail upon us IA rate of taxation
so cumbersome as to be actually op-
pressive and none the less oppressive
because imposed by Republican form
of government.
But what excuse or right have We
who claim to represent the people to
misrepresent them? We cannot claim
that we do it ignorantly for the Gov
ernor has warned us against making
unnecessary expenses. The press mas
repeated the farming. while the people
have cried aloud against the continual
tendency to increase taxes. Is 1t right
for us to turn deaf ear to these
warnings? No, believe that those who
elected us have right to expect that
we shall fully understand what un-
necessary burdens are proposed and
also that we shall make an effort to
protect them from such burdens.
With these convictions ] cannot vote
for this measure till l hear better rea-
sons than have yet been given. I be-
lieve it would be well for the members
measure which would increase public
expense unless such measure can be
shown to be actually necessary. and
the burden of proof should be put on
those who advocate the measure now
under consideration to show that it is
necessary. In my judgment there is no
proof that it is either necessary or for
the public good.
1t is said that the present salary is
not sufficient to enable our judges to
live in a style becoming their station
and responsibility, and hence it should
be increased that they may do SO. But
this argument is not only inadequate
to prove the necessity of such an in
crease. but is actually mischievous. 1t
Is positively bad. because it makes
luxurious living the criterion of re-
of men in public life. The
idea that ones respectability OF i'm
portance is determined by the amount
Of money he spends. is an offspring Of
and is still tolerated and
fostered in countries SO governed.
But for us living under Republi
can form of government and repre-
senting common people to perform an
act which could be understood as
encouraging or in any wa3
approving of such an erroneous idea
would be simply shameful. Once let
The public adopt the sentiment that the
of money spent by one In pub
lie life is to count in the measure OF
his Importance or usefulness and the
lays of Democratic simplicity will be at
IN end and instead we shall become
'ee,ble imitators of European snobbery.
Private fortunes are SO large and so
common that it is not rare to find men
spending tens of thousands of dollars |
for current expenses. do not |
know as it Is desirable to keep such |
nen out of public life nor can we limit |
,r control their lavish expenditures of |
~ H. Rx.Sn Dat m 4 ~