Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1907-03-14

uation of the Italian marble walls of
| asters terminating in monumental
marble entrances to the supreme court
and library with columns supporting
rich pedments. The supreme court has
the walls lined with scagliola and all
| woodwork and furniture is Of black
| walnut.
| The two legislative chambers, which
are located in the two extreme points
of the second story, are built up OF
marble and scagliOla. both with rich
domed ceilings Of oxidized copper, stuc-
co and stained glass.
One of the richest rooms in tho build
! ing is the governors reception room. i'll
the central part Of the second story. IN
der the main porticO. 1t is in pure
French Renaissance and lacks but col
| or to make it one of the most beautiful
and successful interior decorations
| The ground story has marble floor
and wairscoting Of cream tiles ana
contains a handsome circular room at
the east end, designed for Hall OF
History: in close proximity we find
:, very prettily decorated room set ASIDE
| for the permanent home for the Daugh-
| t,re of the C0nfederacy. At cores
nord;nc poirt in the west end is found
| a semi-circu!ar room large enough lot
small public gathC rings or conventions.
| Tho general contractors, the Wells
brothers Co, agreed to complete the
building in 81 months. The actual work
| was commenced on the building III
March. 1901, and completed by the con-
tractors in July, 1903. well within the
contract time.
What Portland asks is not this mag
nificent building which has just been
described and which it has been prov
en- positively can be erected FOR the
sum named by the committee on pub
lie buildings and grounds in it's divided
reIscrt to the Senate good enough Tor
Maine?"
Reduced to it's lowest terms Port
lands offer is to furnish the site for
capitol and $750,000 to be expended In
its erection. The remainder OF the
cost of construction conservatively es-
timated to be about 100000 and limit
ed to that sum, payable in four annual
instruments by the terms of this bill,
would have to be borne by the State
Had our committee been allowed to
exercise it's judgment freely, 1 believe
that it would have accepted unani-
mously Portlands extremely liberal
offer. You are all aware of the fact
that thousands of petitions whose cap
tons were composed of a series OF
misrepresentation and gloomy fore
holdings have been circulated through
out the State, and that every kind of
political device, reinforced by loud
and prolonged howl of economy. has
been employed to prevent us from de-
cided this matter in a judicial manner
strictly upon its merits.
| Every remonstrance referred to our
committee against the acceptance of
Portland's offer is an exact duplicate
Of the one which l hold in my hand
and which Will now read
| Under the terms of this bill, and at
the suggestion and earnest request of
Portland representatives, the accept
ance or rejection of its provisions is
left wholly to the voters of the entire
State, and we say that it is not fair
for this Legislature to take the posi-
ton that the people have already
spoken. when the only evidence to that
effect lies in these remonstrances all
Of which contain unmistakable proof
of a common authorship and We're
obviously obtained upon a gross mis-
statement of facts.
| Bearing on this question, I wish to
read a passage from Cooley, dealing
directly on the proposition involved
here,
"Overlying districts. Even when the
purpose for which tax is demanded
pertains to the State at large, or to
one of its divisions, 50 that a general
levy throughout the State or such di-
vision is essential, there may be pecu-
liar reasons why a part of the general
public who are concerned in the pur-
pose should bear a proportion of the
burden greater than that which should
be borne by the others. A pertinent
illustration might perhaps be the case
of a tax for the construction of a
State capitol. 1t would be clear, we
| should say, that such tax should be
spread over the State at large be-
cause the purpose is a State purpose,
and every individual in the State is di-
| rectly interested in its accomplish
| ment But it is also apparent that
the people and the property at the
place where the structure is proposed
| to be constructed would receive spe-
cial and probably very great benefits
| III consequence Vi tile construction, De-
yond what they would receive in COM
mon with all others. The fact is often
recognized in the voluntary contribu-
tons which are made by the people to
secure the location and construction
of State buildings at the place where
they reside or own property; and the
question then arises whether these pc
culiar benefits may not constitute a
basis for special taxation. To make
them such it would be necessary there