Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1909-03-31
MAINE LEGISLATURE
VContinued From Page Four.)

trra Sonners, Cook. Coolidge Cou-
HEr nMa;;, Harmon. Hartman, Harrington
Havey, Higgins, Hussey, Hyde. Jones
MMa aee %eI,ain K Mns,s Lambert Lord
ham; Miller, Millett, Montgome elrv y Moore m%
4taoalton. Nickerson. Orff. Packard. Pat,
!Gangall, Patten: Paul, Pelletier. pike
R nmnG1 81 prsessley; Putnam. Quinn, Ross.
OF Andover. Smith of Biddeford. Snow Of
brunswick, Snow of Scarboro. Spear Of
South Portland. Spear of Warren, Slower.
t "n Ma;. Thompson, Thurlough, .Traf-
burn-74 'Ae VI <Ao
NAY MAY:-Additon, Allen of Richmond, An
ste eMs, bartlett Rsn;s Of Eliot Bartlett Of
campbell of kingman Charles, Chase Of Of
Se6ec, Colby, Cole, Cousins, Davies. DON
Grant GT, n Iar; HRrabe Ferguson. Gilbert,
Jersey. Hill, Hodgkins of Damariscotta
Hodgkins of Temple, Holt. Jordan, Joy'
Lane, Libby. Merrill of Bluehill, Morse
RRe edion P Patterson. Perry, Peters, Porter
WICK Stackpole: Stanley, Stetson, lib
belts; Varney. Whitehonse, Whitney-57
DaI boEnN nh,o Clark. Cummings,
Hamlin no0ie Hn nafouri Edwards Emery
Marshall, MERCER. Robbins, Weld. White
| Kingfield-19. ' 1'e vi
'o 'ie motton to substitute the mi
nority report for the majority report
was carried.
Mr.. Allen Of Jonesboro moved, that
the rules be suspended and that the
Dill receive its three several readings
at the present time and pass to be
engrossed without being printed.
Mr.. PETERS Of Ellsworth: Mr..
Speaker: Before this bill passes to be
engrossed and before it gets beyond
an amendatory stage I desire to take a
few minutes of the time of this House
IN the proposition of an amendment
L hope the members of the House will
not get discouraged when they see me
talking about temperance or about the
enforcement Of the law. ] desire to
reiterate, Mr.. Speaker. that I stand
now, as I always have for the strict
faithful and impartial enforcement of
the prohibitory law. 1 make that state
ment and I vote and act upon the other
measures with the more assurance be-
cause 1t so happens that for some twelve
years l have been connected with the
enforcement Of the law in the county
OF Hancock; and I really believe that
the records of the court to which
refer in the city of Ellsworth would
show that as large or larger percent
age Of convictions for the selling of
liquor We're followed in that court by
2 Jail sentence than in any other court
Of that kind, any local court in the
State.
Now, while I am and always have
been firmly convinced in my own mind
that this law, SO long as it remains 4
law, should be strictly, faithfully and
impartialy enforced, and I have grave
doubts and I assume the right to
criticise any machinery for the en-
fOrcement of the law which this or
any other Legislature may see fit to
enforce. 1 believe that in locating the
different parts of this, what should be
a completed and homogeneous machine
to operate efficiently any enforcement
law, that we are likely to be imper-
feet in our construction of the matter,
and that error is likely to creep in.
1t seems to me. as 1 have said before
on the floor of this House, that this
matter of the Sturgis law is an i'm
perfect part of a machine; it is a part
that ought not to be there: it is
part that does not work we'll; it is a
part that does not coincide and operate
tremendously with the rest of the ma
chine, and l believe that it ought to
be taken out. I also believe, as l said
before, that under the present condi-
ton of things it ought not to be taken
out unless we make some other change
in the laws l believe that when we
take that out, or soon after anyhow, we
ought to make a change in the tenure
of office of sheriffs. AS L have sug-
gested before, l think if we do not
make that change in the tenure of
office of sheriffs, and do repeal the
Sturgis law, that we will perhaps I'M
Willingly and unintentionally give to
our elected officers the idea that we
are trying to fix them so that they
can or cannot, or may or may not as
they wish enforce the law; and we do
not want that impression to prevail
We cannot 80 back to the condition of
things as it existed before the Sturgis
law was enacted. We can theoretical
ly, but we cannot practically because
we have the Sturgis law which has
so much agitated the people. We have
talked here so much about the sub
stitutc for the law, and If we refuse
the law we certainly. in my judgment,
are leaving it so that the officers IN
certain sense might be justified in say
ing the Legislature is really trying to
arrange it so that we need not enforce
the law unless we deem it eXpedlent
or wise in our locality. l am against
that idea. There was suggestion
made here the other day on the floor
of the House that the proposition
emanating as it did from the Repub-
Hcans. was an invidous scheme to
so arrange it that liquor might be SOLD
in Bangor and Portland and yet pre-
vent it from being sold in Aroostook
or in some other sections of the state.
NV idea is. and 1 trust it is the IDEA
of the members Of this House, that
the law should be enforced everywhere
and anywhere and all the time I'M
partially.
hope, and I know good many
members hope that it might be ar
ranged SO that we could repeai the
stnrris law and put substitute in It's
Mace. a substitute which would IN some
manner change the tenure of office OF