Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1915-02-16
Mr.. PattansalFs Communication

or ire s.s day q February. re
Maine Senate. OF melton OF Senator
Ga-celon Of And-oscoggtc, directed
TIE printing Of so copies O. TIE STATE
II. as legislative document: the
official endorsement OF tte secretary
O. the Senate reading;
Ordered printed ard re-. 70 Col-
on A7I opr.,I31s ana Financial ~
fairs Sent down for concurrence"
THIS action q the sena-e Has con-
CURED Il - IT, House o. FEB. Z.
and me legislative printer proceeded
with re work rhereIcEer.
On Fso. = Al the request o. Cow
- NJ. Pa,tanga.L delivered an ogiai7r
OF ire matter. RS conclusion t4c--y
tazI ,ae action OF the Legislature <as
l1a1t.o-!zed
We sso published in Saturdays IS
sue the full text o. NJ. Pattangaus
opinion, which wzs IL substance that,
as the State has Z contract for Class
= ecoa wo-a) with tie Wate1-ilie
Sentinel and ss thar contract includes
the printing q ire Safe Auditors
report the Ls:slstu-e had 10 power 20
vary TIE terms q TIA, contract By,
o-te-cg i printed 1c6e- Class c Deg
isls-.ve printing.
The opinion {: NJ. Patacgal! Us
supplemented b. Lis p-esen. connu-
I.catioa- makes !, very clear that. z:rl
= single !-p0r-a., exception. We 60
rot d.Es- Wit. him as 70 Tie lar gov
eE-.rg the mater
NJ Pa.tzagzu SAYS:
=
fa--.T when YOU say t.zt TIE Leg.
is-a;1r= INST have in-s-ded either
I-a- This printing Should y <o- IS
80 - =: t-zE j. should take ne
pace q ne cCoa yo-E BIT an
q TIE oF:7to- nat Tou are wrong IL
assuming hat te= former pu-p-se vas
:--:1c@1 tie Legislature rather
= tzssd NJ opinion OF ~ assunp-
w tHs- tie !z--e- purpose was IN
tended y he Legts!aIure. ard note
that you agree with re far enough 70
sag that - This premise were correct
S-ooeaE no o1e would question the
The r=2so1 WY I t@el sure that
my cczs---ctl1-l u re intention. OF -he
legislature - tEe correct one rzthe-
thar yoarz Is because Senator Ga-ce-
question. STATED tha- ire object which
ae had II i1tco11Cl-s Il was 70 limit
tie number Of copies q rh= STATE az
ditors report - So t-s-eai % par
Knitting -le customary number - .5.t
10 D printed THIS vas not STATED nv
the senator c- the @r-7- a. - S--.-s
hut vas s-E-e6 ~ him i ny presence
II conversation. when sAvera! other
gentlemen Including Governor Curtis
snt Representative Brown Of Auburn.
y GO n3t thin. .ha. ycu ard d.-s-
as % lie .aw gorerni7g such mat
ters There s ID doubt t-c t+at rne
printing as i de=ns necessary for i.
oW1 Use Neither can there b any
doubt bit .aa. the Legislature has a
right - delegate 20 the Governor ard
Council authority % con-rac, <o- al
STATE printing: and when such con.
;:@c-s ara made. they become b:-5:as
,:ron the STATE and carnc. BE- tr..--
tere1 with oy legislative order"
Nj. Pattangall comedies. therefore.
hat il ordering these Auditors reports
printed the Legislature was acting en-
r.rely within its powers, provided i.
intended them for its Own use -
Legislative documents rather than
tha, they should take the place Of
the book work TO be done later N
by the Watervilie Sentinel Company
But he bases his assumption that the
latter purpose was intended by the
Legislature, not on What the Legis-
!sla,ure said OF did and not even on
what Senator G4rcelor, who made the
motion. said or did IN tne legislature.
but upon a statement by Senator
private conversation subsequent 70 the
passage OF the order.
Does the DISTINGUISHED Attorney
General seriously assert that the mean
ing OF legislative act. resolve or order
is TO be determined, not BY what i.
says, and rot by anything that was
said or done in the Legislature du-ias
lis passage. but BY the subsequent
statement OF the mover Of the order.
after adjournment, in q private con-
FeEsation, as to what he personally in
tended it 10 mean?
We have no question that NJ. Pat
tangall's opinion was rendered under
the impression that the legislative In
tention was the same as the hitherto
unoisclosed intention Of Senator
Ga-celon, and had such been the case,
we should agree with him in his COR
clusionE. But the action OF the Leg
!slature must speak for itself.
When the Auditors reports were
ordered printed" By the Legislature,
what did that mean? Did it mean that
the Legislature, without debate. and
with no expressed intention 10 that
effect, intended 10 deprive the Gov
ernor and Council OF the right to or
der, under an entirely dis.irc. COZ
tract (oook work. the customary $50
copies bound in permanent and Diff
erent style OF binding? Did il intend
that these 500 copies which it ordered,
were for general and not for legisia-
tive distribution? Il must have SO in
tended. if Mr.. Pa,tangaTs>contenti
is correct, for Il they were for its
own Use, he comedies that the legis,a-
tive action was valid Did it intend
that when the legislative printer Rad