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

can be considered a public use where
the government Is supplying it's onw
needs. or is furnishing facilities for it's
citizens in regard to those matters of
public necessity, CONVENIENCE Of well
fare which on account Of their pecu-
liar. haracter and the ditfiulty or i'm
possibility of making provisions from
them otherwise it is alike proper, use
full and needful for the government to
provide
Now remember this Shawmut Manu-
featuring Co. is a private corpora
ton. 1t has, under the general law,
the right to flow back of its dam on
the general proposition that public
use" within the meaning of this de-
clsion requires that that general pow
er shall be given. 1t has not. under
the general law, the right to take
property under erYinent domain, eX-
ccpt in this way, for this public use
And by this clause we undertake to
give this Shawmut Manufacturing Co.
that right as against the Canaan Pow
err Co.
Now the important thing in this
whole discussion is not the case of the
IoWcT ". VI ZIG SdSS VI NiS
Shawmut Manufacturing Co. it is the
principle at stake. 1t is the general
principle that is at stake, the ques-
ton of whether the Legislature shall
undertake to do this thing. At the out
set. when this suggestion is made. we
are met with this objection: when the
the suggestion is made that these own
ers shall be cut out on the ground that
we have no right to it, we are met with
the objection that if the Legislature
has no right to do it and the matter
is unconstitutional, it will be taken
care of ny the courts do not under
take to pass upon the unconstitution-
ality of this proposition. but say this
If we believe it to be contrary to the
spirit of the Constitution, and some
thing the Legislature has no right to
do, but in this particular instance the
question whether it is unconstitutional
Or not is material to this extent. You
must remember that the Shawmut
Manufacturing Co. needs on this mat
ter, in order to gain adverse rights
against the Canaan Power Co. delay;
and that is all they need. All they need
is delay on the question long enough
to make their development; and even If
the matter should be held to be uncon-
stitutional and be contested and
thrown out, the delay would be accom-
plished in the meantime.
On the question of the actual condi-
ton of these two companies, want to
say a word. The Shawmut people pro-
pose to make development amount
ing to two million dollars. The dam
would only cost about two hundred
thousand. They propose to build an adj
dition to their mill and they propose
to gain by this dametwo thousand ex-
ira horsepower. The Canaan Power Co.
have given an option on the right that
is in controversy for the sum of $12,-
00O
Now the whole question between the
minority and majority report is simply
this, whether the Legislature shall I'M
to me, Observation-Disclosures the
Legislature shall pass this doubtful
and unconstitutional provision for the
sake of saving the Shawmut Manufac-
turing Company the difference between
the price asked by the Canaan Power
Company and what they think they
might get under an award.
I want to call your attention to an
other thing 1 said the effect of this
was just the same as the other pro-
vision which prohibits the Canaan
Power Company from making this de-
velopment; because. in the first place,
the bill provides for compensation for
the undeveloped site. Suppose they
begin construction. They face the pos
sibility of having nothing allowed
them for an undeveloped site. 1t
seems to me there is another question;
under the law as it is now, this char
ter as it is now, providing the ma
jority report is accepted, the Shawmut
people would be restrained or preclud-
ed in the prosecution of the plan. 1t
means they must not develop it, as
look at it, 1t means that if they de-
velop it they shall not be allowed any
thing except for the original unde-
yeloped dam site. This involves in
other words, the very important ques-
ton of the comparative rights of OWL
ers of water powers. 1t involves the
important question, under what cir
cumstances the Legislature has the
right to give a corporation right 81
eminent domain to take the property
of another and allow compensation to
be determined by award. The view OF
the minority committee is that while
thew have no objections to the develop
ment-while they wish to encourage in
every reasonable way this particular
development and all such develop
ments, that this is a dangerous pre-
cedent and something we ought not to
do the circumstances of the case being
as they are, and that payment OF
$4,000 that is asked will be a small
matter to stand in the way and will
not stand in the way of such large
development
Mr. WARREN of Cumberland: Mr.
President: AS representing the ma
iority report. wish to defend that re-
port as against the very able argument
that has been made by Senator Mill
ken in favor of the minority report
In doing this, admit that it is legal
question; and l labor under the DIS
ability of not being lawyer. but must
state the thing according to the facts
as | see them.
This is one of the most important
questions that has come before US TINS
winter relating to our interior waters
| have entire respect for the position