The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1900-12-17

commissioners to the Supreme Court and
the Portland Railroad determined 70
try 10. All psrsies agreed tnas tnree
judges OF the SUPREME Court should near
the case and then render a ueelsion'
There was to be no appeal taken, no ex-
cepsions made and no delays. As soon rs
the Legislature adjourned, MIR. Libby said,
he put IN an appeal in this caee and u
went into the first term he could get 10
into. Then Judge symonds, attorney
FOR THE BOSTON 81 MAINE,
in his serious way, argued in the nisi
prius term that this right to an appeal
was unconstitutional. This was arsusd
at the April term and the court gave
decision In the favor Of the Portland
Railroad. Judge Symonds took an appeal
TO the law court and with rrinted briefs
half day was consumed arguing the
constitutionality OF this act. This was In
July, 'gS. Tbe law court thinking, Der-
haps, that the legislature which met In
January, 1879, would step in and cutsthe
troublesome Knot didn't render its dsois-
ion in this matter until July, 1899, and
then they decided that the act was con-
stitutional and that the Portland Rail
road was entitled to an appeal from the
decision of the railroad commissioners.
eve had now been fighti 1g fr )m 1875 TO
1899 and the matter was still In the
courts. At the next term OF oours." Mr.
Libby went on to say, II filed petition
for the appointment of thrse judges to act
on the whols matter. 1t seems that the
judges vera divided as to whether they
could be required to act as referees In
such q case. IL is common thing in a
road case to have three commissic ners APP
nointed to act on an appeal but the
judges OF the Supreme Court were d.
vided as to whether they were required 10
act in this capacity. In 1879 the lsgisla'
turs had adjourned before any judges
could be found TO act. 1t seems that
some one in the legislature Of 1870 sought
to do q good thing by having the act so
amended that the railroad commissioners
must fret decide as to whether public
convenience required q road 20 be built
before they passed upon its articles OF In
corporation. with his in mind and ar
guing that this changed the construc-
ton OF the statute, Judge Symonds APP
pearsd in oouri and asked to have the APP
peal of the Portland Railroad Company
set aside. This change In the act was
made at the last end OF the legislative sss-
sion and few people knew anything about
1t. The judges overrulsd Judge Syponds'
motion TO dismiss this appeal and he took
1t to the law court on exceptions. 1t was
argued before the law cours and no de
olson has yet been rendered on that case.
1.-THE Portland Railroad had now been
IN COURT FIVE YEARS."
Mr.. Libby said, without break. 1t
was fighting fer the right TO build this
road which all of you people wanted built
and we are going to fight this thing to
the bitter end.
Here came the first applause of the af-
ternoon and 1t awoke the echoes In the
hall - -.
MIR. LIBBY went on to say that in 1897
the Westbrook, Windham and Naples
railroad went to the Legislature and
asked the right to construct its line. At
the same time the Portland haiIroaa was
bef ore the legislature trying to build into
dorham. ut had been working year
and half for this object" said Mr.. LIB
by, 'sbue we did not object to n charter
being granted the Westbrook, Windham
and Naples road as long as they kept out
OF our territory. At our express request
the legislature put In this charter OF the
Westbrook, Windham and Naples road
an express provision that they could NOT
build nearer to 6orham than Moshier's
corner (Applsuse.) What has the Port
land Railroad failed to do to give It's as
surance OF good faith to build this road
to Gorham for the convenience OF the
people here? 1t has always been ready to
bulld this road hera and has been light
ing for five years TO get right to do So
"This year we determined to 20 toNthe
Legislature and ask for special charter
for this purpose. This is our only reme-
dy unless we wish to keen in court for
ever. We want TO build directly 90 Cor
ham and ask for the right to do so. Zap
plause) Because we didn't want to be
met by the technical question that the
Portland Extension Railroad Company
and the Portland Railroad Company
10Th want to builn to this village we took
tina bull by both horns and ask for the
privilege TO build ON the same location Ey
both companies. We have tried to cover
this field and to protect ourselves and II
we are backed up by the local sentiment
and interest we viii light this thing
again to the end. loud applause.l
am a peaoeable man and don't like to
fight but II it is necessary TO fight to pro-
tect my rights
BELIEVE IN FIGHTING.
More applause.) l ask you why any
other railroad should come here when
there is an absolute prohibition in
their charter to prevent them from doing
so. We've been spending our money and
lighting this thing Tor five years as well
as we know how.
"As look at this question and try and
diyest myself OF any personal interest
fact that a single corpora
ton is able 20 hold up the devel- pment
of whole community for tive years to
further its own interests. l believe that
when this. the patient, slow to anger,
people of this commonwealth, realize
where we are and what influence our In
situations are subjected to that they Will
bring about a change. (Appiause.1
1.-The Boston and Maine railroad, as
powerful as IL is, has not bean able TO
prevent the building of electric roads In
Massachusetts and why they should ex-
poet to come down here in this sparsely
populated country and prevent the
people from having these 10Th century
cannot understand. l
am not here to advocate disregard or
vested rights but when it comes to ques-
ton as to a deprivation OF Gorham from
these improved conditions by steam
railroad no corporation can successfully
oppose 1t. They can't do 1t in Massachu-
setUs where the electric roads are extend
ed to Worcester and with the exception OF
one link to New York city and from Bos-
ton to Portsmouth, to York and with
only one break to Biddeford and Old
Orchard Beach and now We have asked
hath fn SaNn and