Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1906-12-18
The City's Side Closed by
Attorney Williamson.
His Presentation Of the Case
Consumes Seven Hours.


The arguments of counsel in the
hearing before the court of county
commissioners on the abatement of the
1905 and 1906 taxes of the Edwards
Mfg. Co. were begun yesterday morn
ing and will occupy two days. The
hearing has been one of the longest in
the history of kennebec county, there
having been 81 days of hearing in the
court room and two days on which the
commissioners viewed property in con-
nection with the case. A small army
of witnesses, many of them experts,
have been examined and the case has
included a great mass of technical de-
tail which was not interesting or cas-
lily understood by one not acquainted
with the cotton industry.
The argument of Attorney Joseph
Williamson for the remOnstrants was
begun at 1890 O'Clock in the forenoon
ana, with the exception OF an hour and
o half for lunch and one five-minute
recess continued until o'clock last
evening. During that time Attorney
Williamson reviewed the evidence at
considerable length, reading from the
testimony of the experts for the APP
pellants extensively, particularly that
of F. p. Sheldon of Providence and the
Hon. William d. Pennell Of Lewiston
He referred to the omission in the
copy Of Mr.. Pencils letter of the
words last Friday" as in the origi-
nal. because they showed just when
and how extensive was the witness
personal inspection of the mill and il
covered up the fact that the valuation
was made from a list of the property
as of 1901, not Of 1905 or 1906. Mr. Will
liamson's reference to this was in
somewhat Of sarcastic vein. as he
pointed out the places in which there
was every indication that the list was
az of 1904.
During the afternoon the reading
from the evidence was more fire.
Quent than in the morning and Mr..
Williamson introduced n number of
tables of deductions and a map show
ing the situation of the actual sales
cited in the evidence. A copy of the
lease between the Edwards Co. and the
Cushnoc Paper Co. was also intro
duced.
The Hon. Orville D. Baker will ar
que the case for the petitioners today
and it is believed that his remarks
viii also occupy an entire day.
Gentlemen Of the Board of County
Commissioners: In the consideration
Of this case. we have dealt with a lit
igatiOn which involves the largest tax.
which involves the largest cotton mill
hut one in the state, the largest cot
ton mill under one organization. per-
haps. one containing about one eighth
of all the cotton spindles in Maine.
1t involves water power which the
United States Geological survey says
is on one of the best rivers in the
United States.
The case, because of it's Importance
has been a long one. The subject
which you have considered. the value
Of the mill. the water power connected
with it, and the valuation of the out
side properties, you are peculiarly fit
ted. as ripe business men to pass
judgment upon.
In behalf Of the City of Augusta,
and the taxpayers. 1 wish to thank you
for the fairness with which you have
conducted the case. Your delibera-
tons have been conducted with a dig
nifty befitting the great cause being
heard.
In the sourse of the litigation it has
been necessary,-there have been be-
tween counsel. differences in the mat
ters of law. It is impossible for any
court to decide these questions fairly
on the spur Of the moment
You, gentlemen are to consider and
decide these three questions in this
case. First, whether the Edwards the
decide these three questions in this
case. First, whether the Edwards
Manufacturing Co, is properly before
you-whether they have complied. in
the preliminary steps. with the law.
Second, Is the value placed upon this
property by the assessors, a just val
tie. The constitution says that all
property shall be assessed according to
the just value thereof. Is the value
placed upon this mill with it's water
power. it's buildings, it's lands, n just
value?
Third, Have the assessors designed
ly made a general differentiation of
property in the city other than that
of the appellant?
To take up the first question.-Is the
value placed upon the mill. the Ed
wards Block. the land and buildings
of the Cushnoc Paper Co. a just one,
and that question you are to decide
Independent of any other property in
'oNH. II is up 10 tIle dpptlldIlIS 10
show by preponderance Of evidence
not the same as in other civil cases
that it is not; for the assessors are
under oath and their valuations are
the result Of their best Judgment and
not likely to be set aside. Unless ma
terially wrong, they should not be dis
turbed. The burden of proof to show
that this property is overvalued lies
upon them.
The two taxes involved I shall take
together. The assessors valuation fol-
the year of 1904 and 1905 for all prop.
erty owned and occupied by said com.
pany was $1.O44.513. or 1904 pei
spindle. 1t is in evidence that tn.
spindles numbered about 101. 900, abou
the same in both years.
Now gentlemen understand that tn.
properly embraced in the two years i
'ne same. I understand that that in
cruces that property on the west sid
OF the river in the mill yard and in ad
oi'i"n l understand would be include
the machinery and machinery for dc
Neiopment of the water power the dar