Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1909-03-24

! TO divide the town of York. nd establish
J the town OF Yorktown" was taken from
| thc table.
The same senator further moved That
| the minority report be accepted.
| Mr.. KELLOGG of Penobscot: Mr.,
! President. being on the committee on
| towns and having sat for about seven
| hours listening to the evidence which
was given in this case. would like to
. review it just a lit,le.
! | would say in the first place that the
committee on towns have had several
| propositions like this before them this
Wear The first was to divide the town of
| i<ennebunk and to make the town of
! ->,undel. We heard the evidence through
| for lve or six hours. and finally voted
that il ought not to pass. They did have
! some grounds for division.
| Next came the act to set off from the
town of Gushing. in Knox county, Fred
! Thornton, with his polls and estate. and
annex the same to the town of Thomas
| ton. That was heard through. and while
| the committee thought there We're not
| any grounds for division. they voted four
for and four against. The chairman cast
''''o'''''
| he set apart.
| Third was the act to set off certain
| Lands, in the town of Denmark and annex
same tc the town of Brownvile This
| case was on the same lines and the COM
nittee reported Ought not to pass" The
| cl arman took no action.
The fourth was an act to set Off certain
! Lands in the town of Berwick and annex
| same to the town OF South Berwick. Let
me- say on this proposition that this hear
| in:. lasted somewhere about FIVE hours
and Senator'S Gowell and Smith were both
there and opposed this division. 1t look
! Cd at one time as though there would
be some ground for that division; but
when it came to a final hearing the COM
| mttee decided that there was no ground
| for a division.
| The next case was this proposition to
divide the town of York and establish
| he town of Yorktown.
Now at the hearing the petitioners had
TO" witnesses J. c. Stewart r. S. Marsh
all j. w. Simpson and one or two 9TH
erS resident property owners. They also
haG Two nonresident property owners.
The claim of the resident property own
ers why there should be q division was
that the seashore section could not get
sufficient appropriations for improve
ments. One of the non-residents favored
the division because he could not have
trees set out along the road and side
walks built to The golf links: the other
could not tell why he wanted the town
divided. / presume he had not been told
III L,t to !, H.,
he thought the town should be divided
Now, the opponents to the division had
for witnesses the chairman of the county
commissioners, the three Seectmen of the
town. two Of whom with the county com
n issioner live below the proposed divid-
irg lire. They also had eight or 10 other
witnesses. all of whom were business men
and who are interested in the welfare of
the town. All but two of these live south
OF the line by which it is proposed to di-
vide the town Of York. There was a 70
nionstrance against the propos division
signed by 49, persons. two thirds OF which
live south Of the line
Now. what are some of the facts
Brought out at the hearing. which lasted
from p. VI. to 1870 p NJ?
FIRST, the town has a valuation of s.
$500 BY the proposed division the new
town would take $oI30G00. leaving $50 COZ
il the old Part. There would b. about 1sa
voters left in the old town ana right
around co.. in the new. High school, two
graded schools, town farm. town hail.
postoffice. all the hydrant service. which
the town has paid for The town has APP
r"i.iA:ed $500 annually fer ways ana
PIECES, . Per cent. of which has bon
raid to the two v;laer CORPORA ions. They
have appropriated $500 for sewers, 500