Norwich bulletin., 1913-02-28
Mayor Mahan Declares No More Money Will be
 Needed For New London Harbor
"6ET THE DOCK, TRADE WILL c0ME," HE SAYS
Hearing at Capitol on Senator McNes Bill Repeal Appro pration-Asserts That Appalling Condition Con- fronts People of Connecticut keeney Express Fear That It Will Necessitate State Tax
Especial to The Bulletin, ,


 Hartford, Conn, Feb. 27.-There was not a very large attendance at the hearing given Thursday afternoon by the committee on roads, rivers and bridges to the bill presented by Sena- tor McNeil of Bridgeport for the re- peal Of the act appropTiating $1,00O, 900 for the development of New Lon don harbor as a steamship terminal There was no special delegation from New London in opposition to the re- peal, as 1t was given out that there was no need of the citizens going to Hartford to tell the committee what had been told and reto1d at the time effort was being made to secure the appropriation That Where was very little opposition to let the matter stand just as it is was manifested in the fact that Senator McNeil had only the support of one man in advocating the repeal. though there were three others who wanted to be shown.
 Wilson of Bridgeport.
 After the reading of the repeal bill Sy Clerk Haynes, MT. McNeill took the initiative in the proceedings. He call fd upon Representative Wilson of Bridgeport. MT. Wilson said he was not in favor of the repeal of the bill until he became better acquainted with the facts, but to an extent he was in elined to favor something that had been done if he were convinced that it was right. Had he been member
 
 he would have probably voted against the bill on account of the finances of the state. HesWould have been pleased to have had the commissioners before of the appropriation had been expend- ed and contracts entered into and the state obligated there was nothing to do but to go ahead with the work He did not know what had been done and would like that information from the commissioners. If not much money had been spent he was in favor of the repeal He said he would vote against the repeal reluctantly, for he did not like the precedent of the state paying for work that he believed should be done by the federal govern- fent, referring especially to the de- veiopment of the harbor.
 A Matter for Federal Government.
 Senator F. A. Johnson, chairman of the committee, informed Mr. Wilson in press and would soon be ready for distribution. MT. Johnson asked MT. Wilson whether he was in favor of the development of the waterways of the state
 Mir. Wilson said he did not know the conditions at New London, but in Bridgeport he did not think it wise for the state to spend any money for har- bor development, as he considered that & matter for the federal government.
 MT Haynes asked if he did not con- sider New London harbor with its nat ura1 advantages the very best in the state and MT. Wilson replied that he certainly did
 Would Make State Tax Necessary. Senator Keeney said that while he believed the original bill had merit he did not think the expense could be met without a state tax. If he were shown that the measure could be carried through without state tax he might not favor the repeal, but at the present time he did not think the state ought to spend the money.
 Senator McNeiII Argues.
 Senator McNeil1 then read his speech, disclaiming any ulterior mo- tive or any personal animosity in in- troducing the measure, and said that the two points he wished to make were that the poor financial condition of the state warranted the repeal of the measure and that the million dollars if spent would only be the forerunner of many millions necessary to make New a. transatlantic sea port.
 From figures obtained of the state treasurer he said that the state had on hand Feb. 1 this year s2, ,472, ,56498, or S1.S15.051.20 less than one year ago, and that S42;6647S of this is in trust funds not available. Estimate of re- 900, which includes S, 100000 from the New Haven road, which he believed to be S600,000 more than actual receipts owing to depreciation of the roads se- curities.- Tine repeal of the personal tax, too, he believed would reduce the revenue A synopsis of estimate of ex- penditures for the coming two years showed necessity and statutory appro- priations of $13, ,130, 729, showing at first glance a deficiency of $4,315,729 which wou1G have to be met. .An Appalling, Startling Condition"
 1 said, had before them requests for ap- totaIing $30.000,000 and he believed the total appropriations would De close to s20,009,000. which is an in crease of S6.S6S.271 over and above the estimated expenses for two years and which would show a total deficit for he coming years of s21, ,184, ,990, .an ap- Da1Iing. startling and serious condition confronting the people of Connecti- l eut."
 lid not include the New London har- 1 DOT appropriation.
 That with the exception of one year l 1907 the state debt had been accruing | since 1902, he said, and the loss for -912 was $4,S77, ,856.28. The necessity | If a state tax had been urged by the | tate treasurer to meet this situation. |
 Time for . Protest.
 Without going extensively into the | merits of the New London project, | Senator McfSeiIl said he believed 1t | vas time for some member of the gen. ,ral assembly to arise and protest | Lgainst the expenditures in the states | lame for the benefit of individual com- nunsties.
 Did Not Vote for Appropriation. When the senator concluded his | beech, Representative Tanner of New Iondcn put few queries to the sen tor and e1icfted these responses: No, | did not vote for the million dollars as a member of the | enafe Of 1911. No. I was not tn- crested in the resolution offered by | 'enator Peck making an appropria- ion of $2.G00,00o for Bridgeport har- or. Senator Peck showed me the bill ut made no comment. MT. Tanner h<s asked # the state of aRheds Is