Daily Kennebec journal., 1911-02-16

! OF the towns and not according 10 theil
| wealth" he said. The tax rate in thu
| remote towns is niue. greater than il i
in the large towns and cities" he said
| Mr. Murphy asked Mr.. Sletson II tho
Grange was responsible for the agitation
| against the present law. Mr.. Stetson re-
sented this and n sharp controversy re.
| suited between them. Mr. Stetson finally
| appealed to the chairman of the commit
| tee to be protected from the manner in
which MI. Murphy was cross-eNaminin-
him.
lie Is member Of tho Jury which is
to try this case" said Mr. Stetson, re-
torring 10 MIR. Murphy, and persists in
arguing the case on which he is to pass. -
c. O. burlington of BowdoinhaH.. 4
member OF the Grange legislative conf
nittoe. appeared in behalf of the Grange
for the amendment. In the course Of his
statement he said that Bath would lose
by tn" proposed amendment but that she
haf wealth and could much easier rails
III money by taxation she might lose by
chang" Of law than could some smaller
tom
Tho present law seems To be in ac-
| on.daneo with the Scripture, said AIr.
lurn@i"n. ''inasmuch as ii provides that
70 ajE VIII" hath shall he given and from
him VINO hath not shall ee taken away
05G that which nc hath
N This point Mr.. PattangaI appeared
| 4n tar scene in opposition to the bill lie
ave tn history of this legislation The
mill LIN Was imposed To reach the wild
la,al~ ~ Il TN which would he conStitu-
I ..,s.l T..
pinpn.ea Il mise money for schools ami
the distribution ot the moucN was made
Imons th" towns to give back to them
something which they had to pay because
of tho conditions arising from The
necessity nf imposing 4 mill tax in order
IL get something out of the wild lands.
Had III. distribution OF this money thus
raised been III ieSiesh hasaS,t said Afi
P8ttangall. 1t would have been nine
tcnths distributed according To the valua-
don ana an"-ttnth according u the school
popel tioH. th' one-tenth heing the sum
taken out ol the wild ltnds by the tax
i;uc the Very men who now oppose the
existing law md ask for this amendment
Insisted on having the money distributed
an INC basi- which now exists -
Mir. Patt5neall said tnat this tax was
imposed not to get money fot schools. for
no an. had asked fer ii, hut 10 reach the
Wild lands He pointed oHt tn, fact THAI
there was n danger, if the legislature at
tempted to make this law 80 that il could
take money from. OH town for The ad-
vantage of another town. af the towns
thus impas Il upon iahiag forces with
tn wind lands which Il. not want Ia be
taxed and repeating IL, Mhoc measnrc.
And thcn yeu would LOSE for tho linor>
to"as OF this St,tr What has been for
them very aoad thin said Nj Pat
tanGalI.
He said that the argument t.at the
proposed amendment would talk money
from the rich towns 10 give To the moor
towns WAS not we'll founded because il
didn't operate that WY. Portland. which
had been referred To as n rich town, WAS
che Of the poorest municipalities IA tire
state, he said, with 4 water district,
hliae" district and other debts which
had almost swamped it. And yet tin
proposed amendment would take 1s "r
"ut Of Portland and give il IL thu city
of BiddefoFd, which didn't begin 10 i,,,e
IS much money for school purposes -
ION $1+.a moro than it gets now" said Mr.
Pattangall, "and would any one be foail4
who would say that this was lust? II
would take away so" from the town OF
Winthrop and large sum from Damaris-
Gotta, which has nothing but its sumn.
resort interests, and Wiscasset, which is
deeayins az 4 town, and give money 10
the prosperous towns of AroostooIi couu-
ty.
IF You arc going II pass bill TO help
out the poor towns and take money from
the wealthior towns for this purpose.
then pass bill for this purp =, bat the
present amendment will not do what you
want done The measure proposed int
Just ana it isn't safe, because even the
worm will turn in time"
He pointed out that there was no sells h
reason for his attitude on this matter be-
cause his own city of Watervillc neither
lost nor gained 10y tho proposed hill. He
bowed that the arguments which had
hc7n advanced for the proposed bill were
not based upon the right calculations IIis
opposition To the proposed bill was strong
3hd ho made powerful argument
against it. In answer To Senator Millikrn
he said that Il distribution Of money on
the basis Of average school attendance
would hr much faircr measure provid-
ing the legislature was certain that the
returns Of school attendance were cor
rect. Mayor Curtis OF Portland, city So
licitor Harvey Of Portland John l..
Bunker OF Bar IIarbor ana others OBJ
posed the bill.
The committee took vot on the bill,