Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1910-08-29

OF Phillips, the chairman of the com
| MISSION on inland fisheries and game
is as follows:
Subject; r. s., Chap. 80. Sect. 40
Screening Outlets of Ponds or Lakes
Payment of Expense-From VIVA,
Source
Dear Mr.. Bracket
I'm your letter you call attention tc
the provisions found in the last two
sentences of Section 40. Chapter 80 OF
the revised statutes relating to the
power of the commissioners to screen
outlets of lakes or ponds, and you in
quire If the commission under that
section, have right to build screens
and pay for the same. out of the appro-
priation for fish hatcheries. feeding
stations and for the protection of fish.
1T is my opinion that the present
condition of our statutes and appro-
priation resolves do not authorize COM
misSiOnerS to screen the outlets of
lakes or ponds and pay for such ex-
pense out of the appropriation for pur-
poses of operating fish hatcheries and
feeding stations for fish and the pro-
lection of fish.
found in Chapter AS of the public laws
of 1909. The reasons which lead me
to this view are as follows; Section
20 of Chapter two of the revised stat
utes clearly provides that all appro-
priations of money for expenditure in
the public service shall be applied
solely to the object for which the ap
preparation is made. A reasonably.
strict construction of this rule should
be applied. Chapter 145 of the resolves
of 1909. just referred to. makes an APP
preparation of Sal. 500 for the year 1909.
and a similar appropriation for 1910.
and designates that this appropriation
is for the purpose of operating the
fish hatcheries and feeding stations for
fish in the state and for the protection
of fish. Nothing is herein SAID about
using any of the money for erecting
screens at the outlet of lakes or ponds.
Il am constrained to believe that the
legislature never intended that any
part of this last appropriation should
be used for the erection of screens. eX-
cept where the power had been special
ly given so to do. You will observe
that the legislature of 1909. Chapter
215 of the resolves. authorizes the eX-
penditure of $500 out of the appropria-
ton of which we have been speaking,
for the purpose of screening Taylor
Lake. so called. in the city of Auburn,
but the authority to do this was con-
ditioned upon the raising of a certain
sum of money by the citizens of An
droscoggin county. and also required
a vote of the city of Auburn that it
1:,,L f1y. k..n IN,
said screen at all times. free from
sticks. leaves. etc. so that the same
would not become clogged and prevent
the free running of water through
the same.
Eight other instances are to be
found with similar provisions namely.
screening Of Biscay Pond. of China
Lake. of Estes Lake of Massachusetts
Lake, of Spring River Lake. of Squa
Pan Lake. of Teddy Pond and Worth
ley Pond. If the legislature had UNI
derstOod that any part Of the appro-
priation Of $47 500 which we have been
speaking of could be used for screen
ing outlets of lakes and ponds at the
discretion of the commissioners. why
did they take the trouble to give spec
ial authority i'm these nine cases?
tine answer to the question seems
irresistibly to suggest in my mind the
conclusions which I have indicated
above. 1t might be argued that here
is a plain provision of the statute in
Section 40 of Chapter 81. giving the
commissioners certain powers. but
those who have been close students of
statute law, have oftentimes discov-
cred that authority is given to do
thing and no money provided with
which to do 1t.
cit seems to me. therefore. quite
plain in view of the special resolves
for screening that the legislature never
intended that there, should be such
liberal construction of Chapter 145 of
the Resolves of 1909 as to authorize
the commissioners to use any part or
that appropriation for screening ponds
or lakes"