Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1903-03-13

1 ate is in some respects the most impor-
tant measure which has been present
| ed at this session. 1t involves radical
! change in the long established policy
of the State, on subject which touches
4 every person and every property in
terest within our borders. 1t is not to
| be hastily or sweepingly condemned
| on that account, nor even because, adj
| mittedly. we can not determine, in ad-
| vance. the financial result, to a cent
| Is the basic principle of this bill right
Is it equitable? Does it do substantial
| Justice to all the communities of the
| State? Does it tend to equalize, even
| in a limited and imperfect degree, one
Of the public burdens which bear so
| heavily on the people of this State?
| Does 1t place one of these burdens on
| the whole wealth and resources of the
| State rather than on some part of it,
defined by arbitrary, geographical
lines? If the bill works in this direc-
ton. if it is but one hating step toward
| the goal of equalization, it should not
| be refused a passage because some of
| details may not be as perfect as fu-
| ture experience may make them; nor
which is not conservatism really, but
tiu1idity; nor should the selfish inter-
ests of some counties be allowed to de-
| feat a measure for the general public
| welfare. Neither should the expense,
| which, as 1 hope to demonstrate, is, in
this case, more apparent than real, be
| made the horizon of our vision.
1t is stating a fact which has be-
come trite, to say that the road and
bridges, as a whole. in the State of
Maine. are disgrace to a community
which calls itself intelligent and pro-
gressve. They are positive hinder
ance to the development of the State.
1t requires no argument to show that
a good road is a positive and increasing
benefit to every farmer, tradesman and
manufacturer whom it serves. The
towns and cities of Maine appropriate
every year for roads and bridges not
far from $1,O00,000 and it is probably
safe to say that one-half of this sum
is for more temporary repairs, patch
ing up, expended without system, with
out any practical experience in road
and bridge building and without we'll
directed purpose. This is one of the
things which is keeping the State of
Maine poor today, and is imposing a
back-breaking tax rate on the agri-
| cultural and manufacturing interests
| of the State.
| This bill now before the Senate has
been drafted in the attempt to answer
| the requirements of a growing public
sentiment in favor of the State and
counties, in some proper proportion, as
Stunning the care of the larger bridges.
| 1t is no more true now than ever, but
! it is more wildly recognized now, that
it is unfair. to require a single town
to build and maintain, at large expense,
a bridge which is often of as much or
greater benefit to adjoining towns, as
to itself: when the greater part of the
travel often comes from other towns;
when the bridge is but one link in a
great thoroughfare of travel. The bur-
den is not placed on that town because
| it reaps the greater part, or even a
proportional part, of the benefits ac-
curing from the structure, but because
| the arbitrary, intangible and fire.
| uuently-s shifting boundaries of the
| town have thrown the structure solely
within it's limits, rather than upon the
| larger territory which it serves. In
stances are familiar to every senator
in which a town. of comparatively
small population and valuation is stag
gering under this unjust and unjusti-
| fable load.
To show some of the Inequalities of
the present system, let me call your at
| tention to a part of the counties, show
ing the percentage which their valua-
| ton is of the whole State valuation,
and the cost of the bridges within their
borders to be taken over under this
bill, to the whole cost of such bridges
| in the State, as returned to the State
| Assessors.
Let me say in passing that the tabu-
| lation made by the State Assessors is
| to some extent admittedly incomplete,
| and to that extent inaccurate, but it
| is approximately correct, and in respect
to the cost of State bridges is very
nearly correct, it's inaccuracies fall like
the rain. upon the just and the unjust,
no one county can claim them all.
| Aroostook county, with Sc per cent.
of the State valuation has per cent.
| of the bridges: Franklin with 21a per
| cent. of the valuation has 4 per cent.
| OF the bridges, SOIileISeI Will o|2 ~ 4
| cent. of valuation has Z per cent. OF
bridges: Ardroscoggin with Sls per
cent. of valuation has II per cent. of
bridges; Oxford with Az per cent. OF
valuation has per cent. of bridges;
| Washington with 3h per cent. of valu-
alton has per cent. of bridges; ana
| Penobscot, wealthy county as it Is,
with 10 per cent. of valuation has ii
per cent of the bridges. On the other
hand. Knox with a per cent. OF the
| State valuation has but l per cent. or
the bridges; Hancock with Az per cent
of valuation has but 1 per cent. OF
| bridges York with 9 per cent. of Valu-
alton has per cent. of bridges; and
| Cumberland with a little more than
| q per cent. of valuation has but is
per cent of bridges, showing which
| fully demonstrates the inequity OF the
| present system
| Now the theory of the bill is-that
| the expense of these large bridges
should fall more broadly upon all the
| resources of the State: that these
bridges being on expensive part of the
public system of highways, should be
built and supported in larger degree by
! nt.1