Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1915-01-14

regulate and litigation resulted The
principles involved is, first: Tho States
right to regulate; second, what consti-
tutes fair earning power for money in
vested. Any attempt to tamper with the
present public service commission law,
or to stop this litigation TO establish the
States right to regulate rates, or any
failure to appeal from adverse decision to
a court of last resort, would be, in my
opinion, an absolute betrayal Of the best
interests Of the State. To those who
favor regulation and not persecution, It
should be said that no one can be or has
been unfairly treated by an attempt at
regulation, for no final action can be
taken without the authority Of the courts
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
Thirteenth: To the office Of attorney
general This office was created in 1901.
1t Is not constitutional office, merely
statutory and therefore may be abolish
ed at any time when desired by the
Legislature The advocates of the croa-
ton of this office held that It would
save the state money. that It would
expedite justice and advance the inter-
ests of the state generally. I voted for
the creation of this office am now
not require such an office. I call your
attention further to the fact that the
expense Of this office for tho last biennial
period has been in excess of $1,000 Tho
question involved here Is not whether
or no this office has been used for the
purpose, so far as possible of limiting
and obstructinC an executive in tho eX-
ercse Of his constitutional duties when
such duties might conflict with the in
tcrests of certain people; not whether
or not the office has been used as =
roostng place for professional lobbyists
who do not suffer from cutaneous
hvpercsthosia not whether or no 1t
has been used for the purpose of creating
q political machine in the various coin
tics in tho state; not whether or no
! the present incumbent will better con-
serve the interests Of the state than
those Of the past;-my present opiniol
! is he would-but the real question in
volVcd is: Has not divided authority led
/ to UNNECESSARY expense and lessenine
Of responsibility and initiative I'm the
! offices OF states attorney? And, finally
! is there any real necessity for the Of
| flee? I recommend to you its abolish
ment with the consequent saving OF
substantially the sum namcd. Prior t.
the establishment of this office and It
is only six or eight years ago, the state 5
attorney OF the various counties, the re-
sponslhiltv of litigation for the state
was his. He could not share II with
anyone, he prepared his own cases and
success or failure was his If ne needed
additional counsel he either won't to tho
Judge of the county court or came tc
the Governor who then had power C.
employ counsel If satisfied that II was
needed, and has to-day as the law has
never been repealed so far a tho execu-
tive's power was concerned. But the
moment this office vas created there
came n divided authoritv between thC
States attorney and the attorney-gen-
eral. and failure or success could he
divided as to responsibility. and my per
sonal opinion IS that it led to divided
authority, and 10 the employing of d.
tectives to prepare the cases rather thar
the cases being prepared, 50 far rs owl
dencc was concerned, by the properly
authorized officers of the state.
COST or JUSTICE.
Fourteenth To tho cost OF admins
tration of Justice The expense Of the
biennial period of 1901 and 1909 wa.
s461.577.33; of 1919 and 1914 S799.092.
So or an increase of materially owe
5000 600. or over - per cont. in clever
years. In 1906 the state changed it,
system Of courts and created n su
perior bench Of Judges The advocate,
of this change held that it would *
pcdte business, simplify justice, saw
the state large sums of money and d.
away with the then practice of re
: forrlnc Questions to masters In m
Judgment tho row system has outireI,
failed To- produce tn, result. elaine I'd
; If it be true that we pav annually 70
administrators Justice $500. 900 and TO
, education 100000 then our system o
costs MS almost ms much as our .duca
ton 1t follows there is somethlni
wrong. believe the difficulty to b
with the system. recommend. there
, fore. that the state at once return I
, the system existing prior to tn
change. adding two or more Judges +
the supreme court and doing ava,
, entirely with the superior court. 81
porior court Judges being statutory
, and not constitutional. officers ar
subject to being abolished by tn
LEGISLATURE at any time. furthe
= believe that the practice of maintain
Ing our supreme court with active
live men. competent and capable %
doing PROMPTLY the work required o
, them. should prevail This principl
; is carried out by the laws Of our sis
ter states. New Hampshire aud Massa