Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1909-04-02

no. The clerk will call the roll.
| YEA:-Allen of Jonesboro. Andrews.
Bearce of Eddington. Burleigh, Campbell
Of kingman. Gilbert. Hines. Ilussey. Joy,
pattangall Pike. Pink ham, ham - Quinn quinn:
Of Warren, Thompson. Trmble-ao.
NAY:-Additon, Allen of Richmond,
Bartlett of Stoneham. Beals, Boyer; Big
Bowsley. Bradford. Bnrse Of Pittsiield;
Russell, Campbell of Cherrytield. Chase of
Sebec. Cole. Corners, Coolidge. Cousins,
Davies, Doble, Duncan Farnham. Han
Holt. Hyde. Jordan, kavanough, Kelley.
Lane: Libby, IMdgate. Mace, Marshall
Mouton, Nelson. Niekerson: Orff, Pack
| ard Patten, Paul, Pelletier, Perry. Peters,
Porter. PRESLEY. Putnam Redlon Rich
ardson. Sanborn. Sawyer. Smith of Ando-
yer, Snow Of Brunswiek; Spear of South
Strickland. Thurlough. Tibbetts, Trafton.
True. varney: Whitehouse' Whitney
I Bigelow. Bourassa. Bragdon, Buswell,
Charles Chase of York. Clark, Colby,
Cook, Couture, Cummings, Day, Donnell'
| Dorr. Drake, Dufour Dunn, Edwards,
| Ferguson. Forter, Frost. Grant Hall,
Hamlin. Harmon. Hodgkins of Damaris-
Gotta, Hodgkins of Temple. Jones, Lam
bert, Lombard, Lord. McLain. MERCER,
Merrill of Bluehill. Merrill of Durham.
Miller, Moore. Patterson, Robbins, Silsby,
| Smith of Biddeford. Snow of Scarboro,
bia, " hle of Wayne. Wing of Kngtield.
| PAIRED:--Emery. no: Ross, yes.
| So the motion was lost
| The bill was then passed to be engross-
ed as amended.
| tThe Speaker in the chair)
Majority and minority reports of the
| committee on legal affairs to which was
eferred bill to authorize the city of Lew
| iston to take ice from Androsroggin river.
| majority reporting fought not to pass
| and the minority reporting Ought 10
pass
On motion of Mr.. Coolidge of Lisbon the
| House voted to recede and concur with
I the Senate in accepting the majority re-
port.
An Act to authorize cities and towns to
permit the use of lunch wagons on pub
lie ways. PASSED to be enacted on motion
of Mr.. Pike of EastportD
Tabled and unassigned: Report of the
| committee on temperance, reporting
| ought not to pass on BILL An Act to
amend Section ) and repeal Section Of
Chapter 80 Of the Public Laws of 1905. pro
|
laws against the manufacture and sale of
Intoxicating liquors.
Mr.. Allen of Jonesboro moved to accept
| the report of the committee
Mr.. HAVEY of Sullivan: Mr.. Speaker.
| | move that the bill be substituted for the
report, and in explanation Of that motion
| ! desire TO make Il few remarks. For the
| benefit of the members OF the House who
are not familiar with this bill l will say
| that it is House Document No 2l5
This bill presents two propositions: first,
| to amend Section of Chapter o. of the
Public Laws of 1908. Section s of Chapter
| q. of the Public Laws of 1905 relates to
| the duty and the compensation of the
| deputy enforcement commissioners From
| reading this bill you will see that it pro
| rldeS that the compensation of the deputy
| enforcement commissioners shall be paid
| by the county where such powers are ex-
| ercised, at the rate of So per day and act
ual expenses while on duty. The original
| bill provided that they We're to he paid
| by the State. The second proposition is
| to repeal Section of this same Chapter
" of the Public Laws of 1875. That sec
| ton relates to the disposition of the fines.
| and it provides that they shall be di-
| vided equally between the State and the
county. Section of the proposed bill
| provides for the repeal of this Section Q
| of Chapter 81. and that throws the case
back onto Section l of Chapter 137 of the
| Revised Statutes, which provides that
fines. forfeitures and criminal costs shall
I've paid by the county where the offences
| are prosecuted
l
| Now, Gentlemen of the House, it is not
| my intention at this time to enter into
| any lengthy discussion of the merits of
| the proposition, because think il is pref
| ty generally understood that this measure
| presents but one question, viz: Is it a
fair and Just proposition. There might
| be in the minds of some members of the
| House a feeling that there is a partisan
side to this question, but l want to dispel
any such idea as that at once. / want to
state here TO the members of this House
| mat was actuated by no Interior motive
! believe from the circumstances and the
| prevailing and existing conditions that
| there was a possibility of two years more
| OF the Stur2iS law, so called, and | desire
| to see the obnoxious. disagreeable and I'M
satisfactory condition of affairs lessened
| and relieved much as possible So
| gentlemen. | ask you not to look upon
| this measure as a partisan measure but
SIMPLY a plain, straightforward PROPOSE
ton for you to either accept or reject
| Now. want to leave with you two
questions which I believe will assist you
in determining your position in regard to
| this bill. The first question is: rs there
anything unfair or unjust in obliging any
| county where the presence of the deputy
enforcement commissioners is necessary
| to assist in the enforcement of the pro-
hibitory law where the sheriff elected by
the people is flagrantly violating the oath
of his oftice-I ask you, is there anything
unfair in obiiging the citizens of that