The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1899-02-10

the city, but Mr.. Libby did not believe
the city would ask FOR such law. If
such law is passed, who is to pay the
bills? Is the county TO bear them alone
or are the towns to help? Mr.. Libby
read some figures as 10 the cost of the
enforcement of law. These figures in.
cluded the receipts from fines for all
offences but violations of the liquor law
were by far the largest item. In Sheriff
Webb's administration, 1881 to 1890, in
elusive, the amounts thus collected
was $50. 36s IS and the expense OF enforce
mont was S74, GA 10 Under Sheriff
Cram, 1891 "a, the receipts were s55, 44474,
and the expense sl02, 800 &C. Under
Sheriff Plummer the receipts were
sl02 sl7 80 and the expense was $40, 267 =
10
These figures represent the receipts
and expenditures of the municipal and
superior courts for the years named as
shown by the reports of the county com.
Inissioue-, and include all the expendi =
lures both civil and criminal. 1t should
not be understood that they relate alone
to the receipts and expenditures due to
the enforcement of the liquor law. Mr..
Libby told the committee that he had
not Teen able TO ascertain in the time
at his disposal what proportion the re-
ceipts and expenditures under the liquor
law bore TO these totals.
The offences against the liquor law
were mostly committed in the cities and
the pauperism due to rum drinking was
mostly felt there. The reason why the
liquor law was more extensively vio'
lated in cities than in country towns was
because in the towns people knew when.
ever rum shop was opened and wanted
it stopped. while in the cities there was a
class of people ready to assist violators of
the law.
In other words, suggested MIR. Chase
of the committee, it was matter of pub
lie sentiment
Mir. Libby said that the addition of
Deering was benefit to Portland because
he believed there was not place in the
United States inhabited by better class
of people than those who lived in what
was once Deering.
County Commissioner Walker told the
violations of the law reported from the
country towns.
Tx Sheriff Plummer told the commit
t ,e that it was as much the duty of the
local authority in Portland to enforce
the liquor law as it was that of the sher
ia but ii had been his experience that
the municipal authorities we've very re-
! ,tupr ~, "a 10 hold IF tina fuattar
County Attorney Libby told the com
aittee that in efforts to secure proseou-
lions under the law in the country
towns he found the same reluctance on
the part Of local officers to act. That is
EASILY explained, said MIR. Libby. The
c. nSuahle in a town very likely is re-
lativa Of the man whose prosecution
is sought. Than he has natural fear
that if he prosecutes q townsman he may
be making trouble for himself Men who
come TO my office to make complaint, said
Mr.. Libby, say to me: Don't mention
my name. don't know but they would
burn my buildings if they knew made
"a complaint.
Mr.. Libby also told the committee that
Portland now receives back consiG-
cradle sum Of money in the witness fees,
of police officers, etc., which Goss into
the city treasury.
RAILROAD MATTERS.
The Cumberland and Oxford rail way
charter was not heard before the railroad
committee today. At the request OF Mr..
lie It'll, who appeared for the petitioners,
the hearing was postponed for two weeks
and the Nestb'ook delegation took the
train for home.
Mr. Peter q. keegan of Van Buren,
made u long argument in favor of giving
tho Caribou and Van Buren, road the
rivileges and right to county aid now
held by she Bangor and Aroostook for an
ex ension of that line from Caribou to
Van Bursn, Hugh f. Chaplin, Esq, of
Bangor opposed the proposition. claiming
taat the Bangor and Aroostook intended
to build to Van Buren, but had been de.
layed by tho business depression.
An interesting incident of the meeting
If che railroad committee was the argu-