The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1910-08-22
WELLS COMES BACK AT CHASE Makes Defense of Business Mem s Associations Public Utili-
 ties Bill ON ITS CONSTITUTIONALnY Declares its Provisions Differ in no Wise From Many Laws
 Now in Force
ON ITS CONST|TUTIONALnY

rom Attorney Prentice w. Chase or this city. in relation to various provis- ions in thS public utilities bill proposed by the State Business Mems Ass3eia- tion. has aroueed no little criticism be- cause it is claimed by some of MT Chase's legal critics that bis conten- tions cannot be pajntaned. The sub jecT has brought out much discussion here in legal circles.
 In view of this fact the following letter on the subject from Ralph O. Wells, of Hartford. of tbe publicity committee of the State Business Men s Association, r<ceived by the Journal Courier is of especial interest:
 MT. Prentice w. Chase has recently published an open letter in which he asserts that several provisions ip tpe public utilities bill prepared by the State Business Mems Association are either unconstitutional or "repulslve or antagonistic to civil goverpDnent." VIII you allow me a brief space in which to reply?
 MT. Chase states that the provision that mo officer. ernploye. attorney or agent of any public service company shall be "a members of the proposed conuission is unconstitutional. Sec tion 1878 of the general statutes requir0s one of the railroad commissioners to be a lawyer, another member to be "ciyil engineer" and the third to be "a practical business man." This sec tion. which confines the choice of com missioners more closely that the pro vision criticized by Nr. Chase. has never been held unconstitutional. Sec ton 145 of the general statutes makes all electors ineligible to the office of attorney general except "an attorney at-law of at least ten years active practice The Board of Pardons is rQnuirad fn includo m its berSl1D a judge of the Supreme Court of Err TOPS and a physician. The memDeDs of the conaHnission. which under Chap ter 2S3 of the general statutes has su- pervisiop of dams in this State. are all required to be "civiI engineers" The inspector general of gas and gas zoeter is required by section 451 of the gen. eral statutes. as amended to be "a res ident of Hartford or New Haven. y In short. there is hardly a public of- flee in the State of Connecticut. from which some electors are not excluded by statute. None of these statutes have been held unconstitutional. Tn fact, the operation of the constitu- tional provision to which Mir. Chase refers has been much limited by the vs. Bradley. 4e Conn. 535. The pro- vision barring employees of public ser vice corporations from membership in the proposed commission is not only wise. but is also constitutional and in accordance with the we'll custom in this State
 MT. Chase says that the provision forbidding members of the comnlissiND to engage actively in political manage ment or campaigns is ridiculous, ab- surd and disgusting. Many federal of ficfals are now forbidden to indulge in undue political activity. The prohibi- ton is generally favored. Members of the Board of Railroad Commissioners have at times been very aetive polite ally. This activity by men in respon- sible official positions has been gener- ally condemned. The judges of our from political activity while on the bench. This attitude is universally approved. Public sentiment appears to disagree with MT. Chase.
 Section of the proposed act is not subject to the criticism made by commissioners to enter any mans private" property, within the cus- tomaPy meaning of the word pri- vate;'' nor does it permit the com mission to compel any man to fur nish evidence in civil Or criminal ac- tions against his will.''
 The criticism of Section 8, although not so specified appears tp be directed against the first sentence only; it would seem to me wise to permit the investigation of many accidents and the hearings on many minor com plaints to be done by a single mem Der of the commission If the Gen eral Assembly Cor it's Judiciary Com mittee) thinks otherwise, the provi- sion authprizing the commission to delegate it's powers in specific cases to one or more of it's members" can readily be struck out.
 The, criticism of section F is unwar- f01 Tn fho nCf Y1la of the proposed act has nothing what ever to do with the power eminent domain Probably MT. Chase in- tended to refer to section 19. But why should not the power to determine what specific property may be con- It is never exercised directly by the General Assembly. Public service cor poratiopS are now commonly permit ted by their charters to take such property by eminent domain as their directors shall consider necessary" See. for example, 13 Special Laws, page 74G IA Special Laws, page 1079; 13 Special Laws, page 1128. Is it not wiser to vest the power of detern1n- ing what property a corporation may condemn in a state comUlsslon (an impartial courD subject to general rules, rather than in the corporation itself (one of the parties 1teresteO Furthermore, section 3680 of the Gen eral Statues Originally enacted in 1849) vests in the existing railroad commissioners exactly the power which Mr. Chase says ought pot to be vested in any commission The section criticised therefore, is merely the continuance of an existing law which has been in operation in this state for over sixty years.
 Section 58 in repeating all lncon- sistant laws merely does that which, if section 5S, were omitted, would be held by the courts to have been done by implication Thus our Supreme Court has stated in City of Hartford vs. Hartford Theological Srpeinary. 66 Conn. 47a at page 4S4-''It is fam iliar rule that when a statute is ex- elusive that is. when it covers the whole subject to which it relates. it will be held to repeal by implication all prior statutes on that matter whether they are general or special
 It is possible that if MT. Chase would examine the proposed act with a little more care and with little more understanding of it's relation to exist ing laws and. it's need under existing conditions, that he would revise his opinion as to the qualifications e those candidates Gncluding all the candidates for governor who have had an opinion to express and the courage to express it, as compared with those