Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1909-03-27

i m.
ment that there is anythino ;,,esaI -, ..
constitutional in the method re ossa..
ing 1t. Now both parties make an assoss-
ment upon all the property of tho st.ta
mat Is equitable, that is lust. This
bill does not say a word about NIL, 800
owners, but I understand that in an az.
seeshent upon all the property of the
state there would necessarily he an as.
'e@siielt OIL the wild lands, and we all
agree that that ought to be, and that &c
WY t"e VIII lands are mentioned here
cause they come under all the property
y, .i'e state and thus far we all agree
'naI every tnins Is equitable and lust.
NO" THIS tax that is assessed is known
as the tax for the support of the COM
i.'on schools or the State. 1t is a school
lund' After you have assessed it and
coiiected 1t, it shall be paid into the State
treasury, every cent of it, and it shall
ne designated as the common school fund
| NO" you have got a tax assessed ON all
| the property of the State, you have coll
lected 1t, you have put it into your State
treasury as common school fund. The
only thing We are fighting over is the
| dlstribution of that tax; and I take If for
granted that when the wild land owners
| say that the amount which YOU assess
| upon them is all right and thew agree 10
1t, that this mill and one-half is not too
| much, you don't want to make it anv less
for the benefit of the schools of the State
| me only questionis, how shall we dis
| tribute it? We should Distribute If as
equitably as we can. think it is almost
| impossible to distribute it with exact
| equity. If it We're possible to do so with
exact equity among the towns of the
| State we should distribute to each town
according to its assessed value. That
| would give each town according to it's as
| sessment, but We cannot do that very
well. and so the bill provides that one
| third of it shall be distributed to the
| towns according to their scholars. So far
you nave done a slight injustice because
| the town that has only a few scholars
would nave to pay for the town that has
a good many scholars. So far you have
not done exact justice. Now if you give
all that fund according to the scholars
you nave done more of an injustice than
| II you gave one-third of it. I apprehend
| 1t IS not just to ask one town
| TO educate the scholars of anoth-
er town and punish them because
they have not great many scholars. This
| fund you are distributing is a school
| fund, it always remains school fund
| Now the other two-thirds is distribute
| ed according to the assessed value
| That far you are doing justice and
| equity. 1t goes back into the treasury
of the towns according to the assessed
| value, twO-thirds of it. The town
| which has but q few scholars having
| paid out One-third for educating the
| scholars of some other town, can take
| that fund that goes back and make
| better schools in their own town. Is
| not that right and just? And | say
| this talk that it is unconstitutional to
| do that is not good sense. 1t seems
| to me that when the Legislative conf
| mittee of the Changers in this Legis-
| lature get together on a common plane
| with the wild land owners, the legiS-
| lative committee OF the Changers is
| going to get left. I am suspicious
| when the Legislative committee of the
| Changers which is not composed of
| lawyers meets a committee of the wild
| land owners who are all lawyers. They
| try to stampede them. 1t is uneQui-
| table when you give back the whole
fund to the towns according to their
| scholars because you leave many towns
| with scarcely any benefit from it at
all. They are raising their tax and
getting back scarcely anything and
| some are losing by it. Under this
| other arrangement of this bill every
| town, it seems to me, is being used
fairly and as s1uarely as you can use
| them.
| 1t seems to me that when we have
| raised fund and distributed it for
| the support OF our schools. it is not
| unconstitutional to say after we have
| given each town so much according to
| its scholars that that town shall not
| have the right to get back the balance
| of what is due them by the assessment
| and make better schools in that town.
| The method of raising it from the wild
| land owners is the same according 10
| both propositions here. You do not
| distribute anything to the wild lana
| owners under either bill. The question
| of constitutionality in one case IS the
| same as in the other. I say the ducS-
| ton of the unconstitutionality or TINS
| law is raised here to stampede the
| Legislature and practically raise from
| the wild land owners mere pittahc"'
| when they should contribute, as inns
| bill says, according to the value :l
their property in support of the schoois
| Of this State; and the towns shon'd
| have something to say about What
that money should be used for or
some portion of it, after it goes PACK
| TO their treasury. (Applause).
| Mr.. WING of Kingfeld: Mr.. Speak
or as a member of the committee on
| taxation | desire to say few Woros III
support of the pending measure. me
| wild lands of our State have never
been assessed anything in the way vi
| q satisfactory tax. Forty or flrty years
| ago the wild lands of the state "efe
considered almost worthless. ana not
| until within Is or 20 years nave "e
realized the rapidly increasing 'ai"e
| of orr wild lands. There are III NY
section large tracts of wild lands anu
T am somewhat familiar with the VIM
land question, all of the lands ana ,
am somewhat familiar with the wiz
land question, all of the territory ho.'l'
of King6eld extending to the caflao'ai.
line is composed of a vast trac' y,
| ~, lands and | know that III ""'