Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1907-03-07

what plans, at what cost, ad at whose
charge, they should be built, and the
uses to which they could be put. So
well established is the knowledge that
public ways are for the legitimate use
of everybody that no citizen would
question this proposition, but on the
other hand the building and mainte-
nance Of these public ways, of which the
bridges are so important a part, have for
so long a time been continued by the
municipalities that it is almost be-
lief that there is no exemption from this
municipal burden-the public, forget
ting that these burdens are carried by
these cities and towns for the public
good, regard them as local obligations
inseparably attached to and continu-
ously to be borne by the municipalities
as an exclusive duty for the privilege
of being a city or town. and whenever
any attempt is made to shift the bur-
den from the unit of the town to the
care of the county or State. then those
individuals, towns and cities, which are
more favored by nature in having a few
or none of these bridges to care for-
cry out against sharing any portion OF
the public expense so long assumed by
| the less favored communities. This con-
dition is simply the assertion of hu-
man nature itself. 1t is simply the eX-
preston of the collective SeltishnesS of
| a municipality which is willing that
some other municipality shall carry the
| whole burden Just as long as it is will
| ing to do so. We are all prone to this
| feeling and it is no virtue that we are
! kuenly alive to its existence i'll others
when our own localities have a large
| part of this burden to bear. l suppose
! | should be just as aggressive against
| assuming this public burden if nature
| and circumstances had located my city
| so that we had TO bridges as is the
! case of my friends who talk against
| tins measure. l might have seen just
| as many imperfections in this proposed
| legislation as they, and if l knew any
thing about constitutional law, or didn't
know anything about it, | might for the
| purpose of obstructing its passage i'm
| pressively pronounced the measure I'M
! constitutional; or if that didn't have
| any weight, and you had examined the
| decisions of our court and realized that
this was public measure, and, as
such, the property of the State could
be taxed to carry it on, if that tax was
assessed equally according to a just
| value of the property taxed. then 1
! might cry out in tones of warning that
| this measure would plunge the State in
to veritable financial whirlpool, whose
| bottom no plummet could sound, and
i'll whose space all things palpable in
the State would be swallowed. If you
would listen. l might talk about the
bankruptcy of the State, or some OF
the wealthieSt municipalities in the
State, but when you came down to the
final analysis you would realize that l
was speaking against a public meas
ure because 1 wanted to save my mu-
! nicipality from sharing a public duty;
that l or my city. more favored in nat
ural location, wanted to let the less ia
vored community carry my share or
my city's share of the public burden
and as much more as she would.
! We are all part of the body polite
in the town, Il part of the town: in the
| State, part of the State, and as an in
| tergral part of the whole should assist
in bearing public burdens, though we
| may not derive immediate or direct
benefits. because other parts of the
town or State contribute to our condi-
tons of life, even though those benefits
are remotely connected with their hap
piness and comforts.
In town government no one would
ADMIT the force Of an argument that
one of its citizens should be exempt
from his share of the municipal taxes
because he was so favorably located
that he could set water from a natur-
al spring, and thus did not require the
municipal water works; or that he
! could drain into stream running by
his property and thus the town sewer
system was useless for him; or being
cnildleSs. that he had no benefits COM
ing from the schools; or being blind
that the municipal lighting system to
him was unnecessary; there would be
other and greater advantages which he
| old enjoy and for which he was under
Obligations to the government in which
he did live, and for which his neigh
| bors and citizens were contributing, al
i though they might be in less need of
them than he was. The very fact that
such man could enjoy in safety his
property and privileges would be due
to the strength and efficiency of the
municipal. State and national govern
ment-then why should he be immune
from bearing his share of the burdens
that make that government locally or
nationally an efficient government in
is entirety.
III state government no one would
seriously advance an argument that