Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1909-03-31

lican platform. That it seems to me Is
the proposition. It is perfectly plain.
and in my mind it Is a question which
we may all decide for ourselves.
| We have received very warm
and kindly invitation to array our
selves with the Democratic party
I don't think We ought to do that, for
there is still a very distinct and clear
demarkation between the principles of
the Republican party and the principles
of the Democratic party; and those
principles are so well known to all of
us that we must not forget them in
discussing the liquor question. 1t is
true, this has been a perplexing ques-
ton, but we must not let the little ex-
element ct this particular time to run
away with our good judgment. 1t is
going to be all right These agitations
necessarily come in political discrs-
sions and political disagreements, but
the liquor question was settled in the
State of Maine in the last campaign,
when we voted for the amendment to
the prohibitory law and when we vot-
ed for rigid enforcement: and that is
precisely the position of the Republic
can party in the State of Maine now.
as l said before, without truce and
without compromise.
| Some one has said something about
the Hastings law. the provisions of
which we all know. that happened to
! so through the House this morning
without any comment. I differ from
some of the gentlemen who have ex-
pressed sentiments in favor of such
legislation. My mind does not resist
| the impression that it has tendency
at least to cast some slight reflection
| upon the judiciary, that great branch
of our government which interprets our
| laws. We are willing to leave to the
| Justices of the supreme court Of this
State the control Of all our property af-
fairs, the things which are closest and
| nearest to us. for their judicial interp-
rotation. And is 1t possible that we are
| to feel that that great department Of
government is not competent to- decide
| upon the question as to whether a man
who has been convicted for selling al
coholic liquors shall pay fine or shall
be sent to Jail? But I yield my own
views and my own opinion upon that
point to the majority party. and if the
majority party saw best to write into
tho Statutes of this State the bill which
is called the Hastings bill. I have not
the least intention of doing anything
that would prevent it or even to criti-
else their action. The matter of Jail
sentences felt was a matter that
could be safely left to the court and
with that opinion. Mr.. Speaker, l de-
sire to be recorded thus publicly But
q q ant in, r l. xI- 90
the present time under our promises
to the people before the last campaign
which must be endorsed and must be
carried out. to vote for a popular APP
prevail under a special election for the
repeal of the Sturgis law. 1 believe
that this Legislature should stand
sQuarely and should stand honestly on
the prol'ibltory law and the Sturss law
just exactly as they are.
Mr.. PETERS: Mr.. Speaker, 1 would
like to ask the gentleman from Water
vile (Mr. PattangalD through the Chair
whether in case it is found that the
House and Senate cannot and do not
concur in the passage of any law re-
pealing the Sturgs law, whether he
would then at that time in that event
be in favor OF referring the matter of
the repeal of the law to the people?
Mr. PATTANGALL: I usually am
perfectly willing to answer any queS-
ton but 1 think I must refuse to an
swer this for fear that my personal re-
marks upon that question might be
construed as carrying the opinion of
more or less Democrats, and might lead
the Republican senators to think that
we were ready to help pull them out of
that hole that they didn't have the
courage to get out of themselves. I
should rather wait until I saw what
your senators We're going to do.
Mr.. PETERS: Mr.. Speaker. I want
to say just one thing. understand that
the attitude of the Democratic party is
that of opposition to this Sturgis law.
Now, where do they come out? A prop
osition was presented here which would
have enabled them to repeal the Stur-
gis law but there was coupled with it
another law whereby the tenure of Of
flee Of sheriffs was somewhat changed.
When that proposition came up the
Democrats said no. They said,
we would like to have the Sturgis law,
repealed, but this change of the law in
relation to the tenure of Office of sher-
ifs is obnoxious and we cannot swallow
it. and we will not vote for a repeal
Of the Sturgis law coupled with that
condition. depending upon the passage
of that resolve. and therefore the re-
peal of the Sturgis law failed.
Now, on the other hand, the prop
osition comes up which is in substance
that il the House and Senate, and il
the Legislature cannot repeal this Stur-
gis law, then refer the matter to the
people and see whether the people will
repeal the Sturgis law. That we have
voted upon. Then the Democratic party
comes up and says: 1--WE don't like that
idea, because that shows lack of
courage on the part of the members
present; we don't want to go on rec
ord in that regard" In other words,
they have this Sturgis law which they
say they want to repeal, and they drive
it up against the wall on one side say
ing it cannot be repealed on account
OF other conditions. and then they go
on the other side and say there is an
other wall and you cannot drive it back
to the people because that shows you
haven't got the courage. What rs the
no Ion 10