Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1905-02-17

These gentlemen made. l SAID 10 MN.
That is not your only move. If they
have wilfully refused, the statutes pro-
vidcs a way by which you can call Il
statutory town meeting, by petition OF
IA citizens, | think, to a justice of
the peace. who will call you one. But
he did not see fit to take that method.
Now they have had as thorough Il
trial as they seem to be entitled to;
and if the committees report is worth
anything to you, it should be accept
ed If it is not, if we have not found
fairly and reasonably in this matter
have not listened to their testimony,
or anything of that kind, should say:
Brush it aside. But we have given
them as careful II hearing as we pos
sibly could. and have reported unani-
mously. having taken the advice of
the town meeting of Boothbay Har-
Dor. which was practically unanimous.
Mr.. GARDNER of PenObscot: NJ
President: In order that | may vote
intelliScntly on this matter, | should
like to make an inquiry of the senator
from Lincoln.
Leave was granted
MT. INfpNrR: L understand there
are some 500 voters in your town?
Mr. TUPPER: Yes. sir.
Mr. GARDNER: What explanation
do you give that only III voters vote
Tor this propositions
Mr.. TUPPER: Twenty three were
all that voted for it. They claimed to
me they did not understand the matter
in town meeting, and some claimed
they We're not present. not expecting
1t to come up in the morning.
Mr.. GARDNER: 1t was stated on
your program foT the annual meeting
Mr.. TUPPER: Yes.
Mr.. GARDNER: You claim YOU did
not get fair expression of your vot-
erS on that occasion?
Mr.. UPPER: Yes-that is what
these remOnStrants claim.
Mr.. GARDNER How MANY were
there present at the meeting?
Mr.. TUPPER: | do not know.
vas not present. l simply know what
has been told me.
Mr.. GARDNER: 1t seems pecu,iar
and important that only III voted in
the matter if there was much interest
in it. / wanted an explanation of whv
they did not
Mr.. ALLEN of York: Mr.. President.
was absent at the hearing when it
WAS placed before the judiciary Com
mlttte. If l am correctly informed,
when the notice for town meeting was
sent. there We're articles in the Warra nt
specifying thu subject-matter to be vot
cd upon. SO that the whole town had
ample noice. II they did not see. fit to
vote it was their own fault. AS / under
stand there were only two at the out
side who voted against This proposition
for change and as I understand, this
proposed amendment was not before
the committee, was it?
Mr. UPPER: No, Sir. The bill was
rot drawn until afterwards
Mr.. ALLEN: The bill was submitted
to the committee, AMI now they offer
a different bly,, the subject matter of
which has not been before committee.
My position is they ought to have the
full matter taken before a committee.
including the proposed amendment
Mr.. STAPLES of Knox: Will the
Senator from Lincoln permit me to ask
question.
Mr.. UPPER: Certainly
Mr.. STAPLES: What proportion of
your voters are at home in March as
compared with those at home in Jam
nary?
Mr.. UPPER: 1t is pretty hard
matter to get at that. l think there
would ordinarily be a hundred more at
home in Jonuary than in March.
Mr.. CLARK of Hancock: Mr.. Presi-
dent: l would like to say that the evil
dence disclosed i'll that matter showed
that there would be but very few. The
evidence disclosed that but few were
away at that season.
Mr.. PIKE Of Washington: Mr.. Presi-
dent: l do not understand the position
of the Chairman of the judiciary Com
r1ittce. the Senator from York, on this
matter.
The PRF.SI DENT: He states that il
is different bill from the one present.
&c by the committee, as 1 understand
him.
Mr.. ALLEN: Ny POSITION is that
hope the report of the Committee will
be sustained.
Mr.. TUPPE1: Mr.. President: If the
committee have not considered this
matter. l would be pleased to have it
re-committed. so that it may be fully
understand. 1 therefore move that the
bill and amendment 10 recommitted to
the committee on judiciary.
Mr.. GARDINER: Mr.. President:
While am not at all interested in this
matter, and have known very little
about it. it seems from the evidence
submitted to the Senate that the sub
ject-matter of the amendment, refer
ring this to the people, was not con-
sidered by the Committee.
Mr.. CLARK: That was fully consid-
cred and fully discussed, both in open
and executive session.
Mr.. GARDNER: Was the subject
matter of this amendment incorporated
III the bill at that time?
Mr.. CLARK: 1t was not incorporat- |
ed but it was talked over and the sug-
%3Stion of an amendment was not con-
sldered advisable by the committee.
Mr.. GARDNER: The Committee did |
not consider the subject of the amend |
ment at the committee r!oeting. did it? |