Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1899-03-17

means, and resting upon this doctrine
of the use of seals today stands the
title to countless millions of property.
and yet the author of this little bill of
five lines has undertaken to overthrow
this system. The man who drew this
bill suggested to me little while ago,
What harm will it do to repeal the
law authorizing the use of seal or to
abolish the use of seals?" l answered
him that it is not for us to say what
the objection is, or what the harm will
be of abolishing seals, but it is for you
to furnish US some argument in favor
of abolishing seals. and thus far l have
not heard any; but it seems to me that
the only argument that can be made in
favor of abolishing seals is that argu-
ment that is made by the little boy
when he goes out in the spring with
his Ratchet and girdles trees because
he wants to destroy something. or the
man who. without taste. pulls down
fine mansion that has sheltered him,
his father and his grandfather before
him, and builds one of those little
Queen Anne cottages with peaked
gables. The truth is, there can be no
sound argument for abolishinS an in
stitution that has withstood so many
| changes and justified its use for SOC
| years.
| SO many things rest upon TINS doc
| trine of the use Of seals that 1t Is not
| conceivable that any lawyer or any
| person, however brilliant his intellect.
| however subtle his mind, could draw
Il repeating act in five lines that would
| not conflict with vested rights and IN
| terests and overturn systems ana prin-
| ciples TO the injury of the people. so
| move, Mr.. President. that THIS bill be
! indefinitely postponed, and l wish to
state here some propositions that &C.
| cur to me as Il reason why the motion
| should prevail.
! First let me say that the sealing of
| a contract implies that the maker of
| it or the grantor of the deed receives
some consideration. What will be the
l effect upon that principle of law if an
! adjustment of the seal is made? If the
| use of seals We're abolished, in my
| opinion. no person could make a gift to-
| day that he could not take back tomor-
row no matter how meritorious it was,
! because he could say, Il received no
| consideration for this gift, therefore |
will take it back" The seal upon the
| deed of gift or instrument precludes
| the possibility of his taking it back. for
it being under seal, there can be no
question that he has received the con-
sideration. Another thing, different
rules of law hold in these cases: a con-
tract under seal outlaws in 20 years,
| while a simple contract outlaws in 6
i years. Did the gentleman who drew
this bill contemplate making change
here requiring an examination of law
Ithat this Legislature cannot make
4 when he drew this little. short bill? ]
Eduestion if he did; l do not believe he
did. So many thing would occur to
one as an objection that ! do not be-
lieve it is necessary to make an eX-
| tended argument. even for the benefit
of those who are not familiar with the
tlaw. But it was said by the gentleman
| who argued for the adjustment of the
seal in the House this morning that he
| knew an instance of a man who lost
| something by deed not being sealed.
The man who made the deed forgot to
| seal it. therefore the grantor lost the
| property. But | will say that man
might forget to sign his name to a
deed and it would not be a good deed.
! and you know the necessity of sealing
just as much as the necessity of sign
ing. and there is no argument in that.
| No argument has been advanced that
to me seems sound for overturning the
wisdom of ages. by any individual or
any number of individuals who wish
to ask that things that are old and set
tied and vested be done away with and
| hope that the Senate will say to re-
!. formers and those who desire such
changes that it is well to leave that
which we have as system of law, at
least until some pains have been taken
to formulate a system that Will take
the place of it and will not leave us in
confusion SO that the difficulty will be
infinitely greater to settle the disputes
that will arise because of this made
quate change of a system than the use
of a seal under present law.
Mr. PLUMMER of Penobscot: ]
would like to ask the learned gentle
man who has just spoken. for infor-
nation, if there are any states in this
Union that have abolished the use OF
seals.
Mr.. STEARNS: l would state to
the senator from Pcnobscot that J
heard the gentleman from Greater
Portland in his argument, this morn
ing, give the names of number OF
states that have abolished the use Of
a seal, and | remember that Indian
Territory heads the list: there was
I also Colorado and Arizona, and think
Iowa. Then / heard it stated there.
which is the fact. that very many OF
the states most of the states recognize
\ a scroll or mark of the pen. as seal.
but that change in no sense affects or
touches the law upon which the seal
rests: it simply provides that some
thing else than piece of paper. or a
Il wafer, may be seal. l wish to state
further. at the suggestion of the gentle
man from Somerset. that those states
that have abolished a seal practice UNI
der a code: that is, they have abolish
ed a whole system of practice, ana
when one man sues another. long
statement is written. prolix enough to
furnish manuscript for a pretty long
work. and they affect to despise the
learning that has come down to US and
n "a az