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

Il Twice has this young New Yorker beer
denied what is so plainly his right OF
rather what would be defined as his
right were his claim against an individ-
ual on the same grounds instead of
against the State.
There is no denying that his money
was received by State Treasurer Smith
| There is no denying that Reyes thought
he had very good thing and there were
many reasons why he should expect a
| square deal instead of the raw hold-up
| which was practiced upon him. 1t was
on one side the old case of a fool and his
| money soon parting, but the invest
ment was made with a sovereign State
| as a party to the transaction On the
| other hand it was the State which prac-
| ticed the delusion upon a clean gen
| tleman who did not believe there was
any ground for doubling the reliability
| of the State of Maine.
In the name of all decency and fair
ness and equity, the money which was
obtained from Mr.. keyes by the State
under what 50 closely looks like plain
bunco steering should be returned to
him. The people of Maine are honest
enough to approve such disposition of
| the claim
Gentlemen, if an individual had done
what the State of Maine did to this young
| man some body might call it sharp prac-
| tice, somebody might call it dishonest.
The State of Maine cannot afford to be
| accused of sharp practices, it cannot af-
ford to be disgraced, because the disgrace
of the State of Maine is/a disgrace upon
every individual in the State of Maine
The hands of the State of Maine, Mr.
Speaker, are dirty today. Let us wash
them.
Mr.. PATTANGALL: Mr.. Speaker, just
a word. If there is involved in this case
nothing but a question of simple homes
ty and no legal question, will some gen
tleman explain to me why it was sent.
instead of to the committee on claims to
the highest legal committee in the House
the busiest committee in the House and
the one committee from whose ranks
could be recruited four or five men who
could debate this question on the floor
of this House? M
Mr.. DAVIES: Mr.. Speaker +
Mr.. PATTANGALL: | have the floor at
this time.
The SPEAKER: The gentleman refuses
to yield. Il
Mr.. PATTANGALL: / say that the
sending of this resolve to any committee
except the committee on claims, unless
there was some legal question involved,
was of itself something that should have
caused the committee, every member of it
and all the members of the Legislature,
to scrutinze it with care If nothing
inNn1va6 m af elm, IL,
honesty, what was the judiciary commit
tee of 1905 doing and of what kind of men
was it composed when it turned down
this resolve? Is this the first honest jul
dietary committee that has been empan-
eled in this House2e1f it was a question
Of simple honesty and nothing else. why
did the gentleman from Yarmouth and
his associates on the judiciary committee
two years ago not pass it instead of re
ferring it to the next Legislature? / sup
posed they reported against it; the gen
tleman corrects me and I admit the error
for L was not a member Of that Legisla-
ture. But l say now if nothing was in
volved but question of simple honesty, |
why did you refer it to the next Legisla-
ture? Was not your committee capable |
in 1907 of deciding questions of simple |
honesty? Did it take six years for the
State of Maine to assemble the men as u
judiciary committee who were capable of
deciding questions of simple honesty and
then We're unable to unanimously report
this resolve, for one member of that COM
mittee at least has not agreed to the
proposition? Is there a man in this
House. lawyer or layman, who will say
that he will go home and advise the Sc
lectmen of his town or the municipal Of
ficers of his city to pay back to every body
who has bought a tax title for 20 years
from that town the money which went
into the town treasury? Is there one of
you who will do it? Will the gentleman
from Augusta advise the treasurer of the
city of Augusta to make good every tax
sale made by this city? Will the gentle
man from Yarmouth advise the town of
Yarmouth to do it? / think not 1t is
easier to vote money from the treasury
of the State than from the treasury of
municipality which comes nearer home to
the taxpayer.
The gentleman says it takes two men
to gamble and the State of Maine ought
not to gamble Every tax sale advertised
by every town in Maine is an invitation
to some purchaser to come along and
speculate or gamble in tax titles. The
State of Maine had a law which was of
such n nature that it could convey no
title under a tax deed Is there town
in Maine that conducts its affairs so it
can convey Il title by a tax deed? / know
of none. And yet he would say that those
towns were INDUCING in immoral acts
when they advertised land for forfeiture
of taxes, and We're doing sensible thing
if they refunded to the purchaser the
money. No like proposition was ever put
UP to a municipality OF to a county; and
wherein do the morals of the State differ
from the morals of your city and your
town? We are all one people The good
name of Waterville and HoultOn are as
dear to the gentleman from Houlton and
to me as the good name of the State of
Maine; and it seems to me a strange
position that we should adopt one code of
morals for our municipalities and another
code for our State government. For
say there is not a man in the House
who would say that he would advise mu-
inequalities to go back over their rec
ords and make good the money which
tley had received for tax titles which