Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1907-02-15

| ence between Republican and a DEM
ocrat when you scratch the backs Of
| both before election day. daughter. }
When you adjourn what is to be your
| policy? Talk about your surplus rev.
! enues. talk about your 100000, when
! here is million dollars knocking at
your door fer charity, for good roads.
| for hospitals. for new institutions, for
right. for justice. for Christianity, be-
| nevoIence and philanthropy and for all
| that makes this State worth living in.
Ii the surplus revenue troubles you,
give these iong-suffering people upon
| the hills a little relief from the direct
State tax. 1t means something to those
| men out on the farms to earn these
| taxes. They don't clip off coupons to
| meet their tax bills.
/ don't want to be too personal to
| the city Of Portland. and 1 don't know
what the position of my city is before
| these committees. but on some of these
| economic questions | have been argu-
| ing l nave Il faint suspicion that Port
land, at least | know, and per-
haps Augusta have been trying to
tris the way of legislation which
seeks to secure the proper apportion-
m2nt OF burdens between the cities and
| towns to right the great wrong whiCt
has been going on in Maine ever since "
We're a State of making the towns pay
| their undue share, and in addition. to
| that burden which you are assuming be-
| fore these other committees of blocking
legislation. you want to reach into the
little wealth they have and take one
dollar out of every hundred to spend in
an Unnecessary and wasteful State
House. Dare you do it?
One part of my argument / want to
address largely to my friend General
Mattocks, and I trust if l do not make
my positions plain that he will interrupt
! me, and l give him free permission to
| do 50 because to me, Mr.. Chairman, and
/ believe there are two lawyers upon thi
committee-to my mind there is under
meath this discussion question not yet
discussed in public print or in any of
| these hearings that o ught to be the first
| question settled of ALL and that is, has
| the city of Portland, even with an enab-
| ling act from the Legislature. the power
| under the constitution of Maine to do
nate in any form whatever, by bond, tax,
| gift or otherwise, 100000 to the State of
Maine for the purpose of a State Capitol?
| I have taken some pains. Mr.. Chairman.
approaching the full responsibility of
what it means. to study it. I hope that
| at my age, and after the 20 long years |
| have spent in the court of Maine, I APP
| preciate the responsibility of asserting
at any time or in any place. in my office
or in public. legal opinion; and charg-
1 ed with that responsibility and appreciat-
| ing it, I hope, 7 crave the attention of
| this committee if I argue that question.
| for that is what we seem to have roach
| ed. The question is not whether Port
| lands bride is to be accepted. ] submit
| there is Il deeper question than that. Is
| it a BRIDE and if a bribe IS it payable in
| counterfeit money? In 1879 the supreme
| court of the United States. the greatest
| court in Christendom. said this: at is
| degrading to a state and reflects no hon
| or upon it to accept Il donation from 4
| particular locality to secure tho location
| of a state institution" That opinion was
| concurrcd in by Nathan Clifford, Port
| lands greatest iurist; and today his
| grandson, himself q learned lawyer,
| comes to this committee with "a propo-
| sition which his great ancestor joined
| with the rest of the court in saying was
degrading to a state and without honor
| to the city that makes it. This, my
| friends. is not a question of whether
| you will pass an enabling act CT not.
| 1t is a question of the constitutional
| mower of this Legislature to authorize
| the city of Portland to do this. I take
| it T need spend no time on the PROPOSE
| ton as to the 5 per cent limit of the
| city of Portland. His Honor. Mayor
| Clifford, informed me this morning thai
| the borrowing capacity of Portland is
| but $4,000. We are all familiar with the
! per cent. limitation in our constit1I-
| ticn. And that per cent. I need not
| say to tho lawyers of the committee
| that 5 per cent. is reckoned upon tho city
| valuation ard it is the gross debt of the
| city. not the net. Mayor Clifford this
| morning was good enough when ] went
| to him and asked the question, TO say
| that the present borrowing power Of
Portland was but $1,000; so that to us.'
| the 100000 act if ever passed, it would
| be necessary for Portland to take some
| Of the assets in her treasury and reduce
| her debt down in order to get those
| bonds out But assuming that the city
| of Portland did unwise thing as
| that-and up to the present hour she has
| jealousy hung to the control of her gas
| works and the railroad outlet to the west
as being a thing Of far more Importance
| than the qualification Of her pride in tho
| building of a State House. and I don't
believe the hour will ever come when
! Portland would be guilty of such folly
| but assuming that she is. what then? The
| supreme court of this State in Perkins
| VS.. Milford, seth Maine, page 49, said by
| way Of dictum, that the constitution
| gives no authority to raise money to give
away. Not a question of construction of
statutes; a question of constitutional
| power that under the constitution, as
| they said, the constitution gives no au-
| thority to raise money to give away.
| And. gentlemen, the precise question, the
| exact question in legal principle, was
settled by the supreme court Of this State
| in the great case Of Dyer vs. The Farm
| ington Village Corporation. The differ
| ence in facts is immaterial. it is always
| the legal principle that makes the rule:
| and if my friend is familiar with that
| case he knows state it with perfect ac-
| curacy when T say that the court there
decided that the same piece of property