Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1911-03-21
The Sewer Again.


Editor Democrat
In the report In the Democrat Of &C
ton at our annual town meeting, hard
ly think you did full justice to me in tn
controversy with the legal lights as t
CONFORMITY with the letter and spirit o
the statutes with relation to sewers.
read from the law, as you say, and de
clared the action taken Illegal, and Law
yer Wright said 1t was legal, but yol
failed 70 allude to Section II later, aftel
covering all the previous rights and regu
lations to sewers for the public, which
| read, and is as follows:
"Sec. u. The seven preceding sections shall
not apply by the Inhabitants OF such town, OF
the city council Of any such city, until they snail
have been accepted by the Inhabitants or sucf
town. or council OF such city. at legal meeting
called for that purpose"
This is conclusive, and not one single
privilege is granted to the town To take
action and say what shall be done by any
but the municipal officers or sewer board
Again, the statutes say before land is
taken outside of the highways, public
notice shall be given and damages assess,
ed therefor as is provided for location oil
ways in a town; yet land was taken out
side without any public notice, which is
a notification of the letter and spirit OF
the law. which | can not approve nor
accept as a good citizen, if Mr.. Wright
does positively declare 1t is surely legal,
unless his statute is different from mine
and my error lies there.
II I am wrong | want to know it, il
am right / should stand by it.
Then again, the declaration of the
moderator when l read the provision
about the completing and entering the
sewer, that l had not read all, was an
intimation that the vote of the town to
allow parties to enter the sewer, and
fixing the prices to enter, was correct,
when the law says the municipal officers
or sewer board shall do it; and l say
there is not ono word of giving the town
power to do so, only to approve or reject
the action of the officers adjustment
and report.
Section I THAT is what l suppose he
had allusion to when he said had not
read ally says any person may enter his
private drain into any such public sewer
while the same Ia under construction
and before it is completed and before
the assessments are made, on obtaining
a permit in writing from the municipal
officers or sewer board having the same
in charge, etc. and not by the towns
voting the right and prices to do SO.
There is not one single word about per-
sons and rights to do, that is not cover
ed by Section II thereafter and hereto
fore quoted, giving the town right tn
arrange ouly to accept or reject, in my
for can fairly read the common
English language and understand it.
In the construction of drains and
sewers the law provides that when
public sewer is constructed the mu-
licipal officers shall determine what lots
,r parcels of land are benefited by such
sewer, and shall estimate and assess upon
'uch lots such sums not exceeding such
benefit as they may deem just and equit
.ble towards defraying the costs of such
sewer, the whole amount not to exceed
10 per cent of its cost. This is tax up
IN the abutters of such sewer, and they
must pay this amount whether they
enter the sewer or not, and this secures
/ right to enter the sewer if they see fit.
This tax is lien upon the lands and
and can be used to force pay
nent, so if you do not want to pay this,
10 not ask for sewer.
This attempt to vote cheaply by the
own for parties to pay and enter, is to
,ullify the letter and spirit Of the law,
n my judgment, and to make it equit-
IDLE men should pay in proportion to
he benefit found by the officers in their
If the officers fail to satisfy
arbitration can be had, but this must be
paid whether you enter the sewer or not,
md the payment secures properly a
light to enter the sewer, TO those on its
inc.
Towns are having controversies about
he matter of sewers all over the state,
,ut it seems to me the better way is for
he corporate villages to have the con-
rol and care of the same, and II towns
need drains and sewers to take away
waters from the ways in towns within
villages, the town do such part as is
found equitable and just to assist, and
be just toward sections needing assist
ance.
Norway has obtained power and rights
lOT uer NitIdpo CoTpOIdtiou W COuStt uOl
sewers, and why not South Paris village
10 the same, and the town do what is
Just in care of highway improvement
and drainage? The only trouble is in
arranging, and not crowding by
sither side. Several parties interested
in Western Avenue Improvement have
stated to me If sewer could be con-
structed so as to be convenient there,
they would pay good fiattering sums for
the privilege of entering the same, and
together with fairness can not this be
met justly to all?
If my statute is just like all others for
this state some one is wrong in strictly
and fairly obeying its de-
mands, and who is it?
Fl. G. BROWN.