Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1905-03-16

l want to call attention to few pre-
cedents of Ihis House, and l claim
right mere that We should be guided by
the precedents of this House and not
attempt to draw analogieS which must
necessarily be misleading from the dc
ings of Congress. They are not our
guides. In that respect We are la"
unto ourselves. They do not establish
our rules. We establish our own rules
and we should be guided by our OWL
precedents. The bill l shall refer TO
originated i'm The Senate. came to
the House and were concurred lii
and became laws. There was a
bill relating to the assessment or
taxes i'll unincorporatad places intro
duced into the SENATE in 1888, as ap-
pears by the Senate Journal of thai
year. page 81. and which was enacted
INTO law as is SHOWN by the Senate
Journal. page 49,. In 1887 an Act chang
ing the law as to the taxation OF rail
roads was reported to the Senate, con-
CURED in by the House without an OBJ
lection and was finally r"ssed to be en-
acted on Marra 9TH, 1881, as shown by
the Senate Journal. page 4O9. In lS"?
an Act to amend Section six of Chap
ter six of the II 'viSed Statutes was in
.rGduced into the Senate, relating to
| this very chapter which we are now
considering. 1t pertaincd to property
exempt from taxation. II was concur
red i'll by the House without an Objec-
ton and finally enacted. as shown by
| the Senate Journal. page 1863.
l am willing to cOncede to the gentle
q M
| intimate knowledge Of the law and the
| constitution, none better versed i'm this
House today. but I am not. willing to
| concede to him all learning and all
knowledge. and | am not willing 70
cOncede that he knows more about the
constitution and the laws than the
gentlemen who were members of this
Legislature at the time these precc-
dents Were made. I am not willing TO
concede that the gentlemen sitting in
Congress. now or at any other time
ara necessarily greater jurists than the
men who sat i'm this Legislature when
these presidents were established and
who concurred in them. The array of
legal talent in this Legislature at that
| time il seems to me is sufficient to
show that measures of this kind were
net allowed to be slipped through and
| that the privileges of this House would
not be encrOached upon without pro-
| test. In 1896 a bill for taxing trust and
banking companies WIS reported in the
Senate. passed to be engrossed and
| sent down for concurrence. amended
| by the House and passed to be en-
| grassed without further objeo ton.
Mr.. LITTLEFIE:LD: I would like
| to ask if the bill which the gentleman
from Portland has just mentioned in
his opinion is a bill for raising revenue?
Mr.. REED. No. and this is not eth
er. Neither of them are. Now we have
| an act relating to the taxation of rail-
| roads in the same year which was
passed to be engrossed in the Senate
and sent to the House and finally
passed without any technical objec-
| tiors in the year 1893.
Mr.. LIT1LEFIELD: In that year
the taxes on railroads We're increased
| by that act. We're they not?
Mr.. REED: Yes, think that is the
year when they We're increased. 1t
seems to me that this is more of rev.
enue measure than the bill we are now
considering.
Mr.. LITTLEFIEID: would ask the
gentleman his opinion of that bill that
! increased the taxes on railroads,
whether that is a bill raising revenue?
Mr.. REED: l don't think it is under
| the provisions of our constitution. |
| think it was properly introduced in the
Senate and properly passed by this
House; and in regard to every prece-
| cn 70 r tIoa
same answer They are none of them
revenue bills. Now. i'm 1898. an act was
passed relating to the taxation on land
| in places not Incorporated. reported in
| the Senate as shown by Senate Jour
| nal. page *15 and concurred in by the
| House without objection. Evidently if
we were wrong in the past we were
grossly and terribly wrong, and it is
| for the gentleman from Rockland to
come here and correct a long estab
lished and very unparliamentary usage.
do not believe that we are willing to
concede that position at this time.
| Under the constitution of Massachu-
sets the provision is that all money
| bills shall originate in the House. This
| was passed in 1880 and it is practically
| the provision now. In a MaSsactu-
sets report. Vol. 127. is given the opin-
ion of the justices of the supreme court
to the Legislature in regard to this
provision OF the constitution. and the
| opinion ends in this way: "Then there
| being 70 other clause in the const-
tuition establishing Il procedure i'm this
particular, the right of both branches
must be equal" That is precisely the
| position which we take, and We claim
| that in this instance the right of both
| branches is equal. When revenue bills
as such come before you for your con-
lsideratiOn they will come as original
bills and will originate in the House.
Those are the bills for raising the tax
Those are the revenue bills to which
the constitution pertains. The law and
the rrecedents of this House are not
wrong, and l do not believe that we
wish at this time to set them aside.
The presidents quoted by the gentle
man from Rockland in the national
House of Representatives do not ap-
ply. We were right before and we are
right now: and 1 believe that gentle
men in voting upon this resolution will
take that position.
Mr. T,TT'r1 ,EE,J EI n. M Cpa,lyor