Norwich bulletin., 1913-05-23
125 to 82 the Ryce amendment prevail

The debate on the nam issue was
 opened by MT. Ryce who said that but
 few members were familiar with the
 features of the corporation laws,
 but he conceded that the members
 could see the nigger in the wood pile
 if the wood was thrown aside. he ] then spoke in favor of the measure, declaring that it was essential that this company should have increased powers so that they could better sup ply the public with light and power at a reasonable cost. This company
 should not be compelled inI order to get needed rights to purchase an un- used charter that would convey all the privileges, and which is probably held for sale. Mir. Evarts of Milford, was l opposed to the bill as he believed it ! interfered with the municipal owner l ship of gas and electric light plants. i MT. King said the company has been sold eight times and that the men that was back of the Connecticut 1 Power company which is so well known 1 that he would oppose the bill. i MT. Lockwood said the day of the ] small electric company is over and he could see no reason why the bill should not pass. This is not a new charter but under it service is already i being served in a dozen cities in the state By the erection of power house at tide water electricity can be fur nished much cheaper than now and | for the public good. He could see no good reason why the bill should not | pass
 1 Mir Tanner spoke in favor of the | bill, stating that the committee on interpretations had given no Opposi- 1 tion to the new features, but rather i features, that were put in the charter | twelve years ago.
 AIr Thoms said this was merely i fight between two companies. He said i four fifthS of the manufacturers in l Waterbury want the passage, for the i best and cheapest power is wanted. If the bill is granted the company can i build a power house at tide water and send power up the Naugatuck valley, and for the benefit of all the manu-' 1 factUrers in the valley.
 | MT. Healey said that the charter was | secured twelve years ago, and he was named as incorporation but had no interest in any company. He was op- posed to the creation of a, monopoly of | the electric ligfA business and to this
 measure The men behind this meas
 ure have not a dollar in property in l the state, but have issued $569 900. l This company now owns plants in ] Greenwich, in the Naugatuck valley, in Hartford county, Rockville, Willi- mantle and New London, which means a high tension system throughout the
 | state, with all the attendant dangers
 ] 4 nc Ol1lpdIS Has EOlO d1l Us property
 to the Virginia company. MT. Healey
 said that he had been told that the
 democrats were going to try to get
 this measure through the house and if they do they must take the responsi-
 bility- and he reminded the democrats that the party was opposed to monop- oly.
 MT. Magee said the state has noth- ing to give away, but there is no req son why the rights held by an op- posing company should not be granted 10 the company in consideration. It was not a measure of monopoly, but of competition, and the whole affair was a fight between two big electric lcompanies. He stated that the Con- l necucUt company, of Boston, contrOlI- l ed the New London, Portland and sev- eral other plants in the state, has i statewide rights and does not want i the United Electric Light company to come in. Let the companies come in and get the taxes and let the utility 1 commission control them, and then perhaps there would be no need for a
 state tax. It is a fair proposition and should be passed in the house.
 ! MT. Hall said it almost made him laugh to listen to opposition to measure that never came into the house so rigidly restricted, He said the peo- pie who opposed this charter should have two swifts kicks properly placed. 1 Mir, Bealey said he had no objection to have the proposition of MT. Hall tried on him.
 MT. Hall as a matter of personal
 privilege explained that his remark
 was not directed at MT. HeaIey or
 any other member of the house, but
 at the people back of the opposition, and if it touched the feeling of Mr. 1 HeaIeY he offered apology.
 i MT. Healey said that being Irish he
 was ready to meet any one when hit
 and he accepted the apology,
 1 A roll call was ordered with this re- suit: Whole number votes cast, IFS. necessary to prevail. 90; no, GA; yes, | 114. The speaker declared the report ! of the committee and the passage of 1 the bill. A motion to reconsider was | lost.
 ! Tose voting yes in New London l county were: Sullivan, D. F. Williams
 Avery. Rathbun, J. s. Hall, Tanner, May, Brown, Maine, Delaney, Haynes, Betting, Latimer, Holdredge and Daw- 1 ley. No-Hoxie, Moves, Craney. Ab- sent or not voting-Elgart, Beckwith, 1 L'Hereux, Watson, Geer, Shea, ! Pearson, Chapman, Burdick Buteau, Chesebro and Lanphere.
 ! In Windham county those voting yes
 were Gardner, Bessette, Danielson, French, Gallup. No-Baker, Chap peil, F. w. Congdon w, P. Kelley, l Davenport Macdonald, Perry c. Cong don, Johnson, Richmond, T, J, Kelley, 1 Bugler, Morse, Paine, Absent or not voting-Eastman Smith, Huntingdon, land Plessis,
 l After the house adjourned Congress
 man BfaEan was warmly eongratulat= i ed en the outcome of the vote, I