The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1915-03-12
DOINGS OF THE
LEGISLATURE
Continued from first page.)

Mr., Soule OF Alburg that the bill be or
dered to lie was defeated on a rising
vote, 30 to 9S. Mr.. Melendy OF London
derry explained the bill. Mr.. Hutehins
of Stannard opposed the bill and MIR.
Mayo Of Mortified favored 1t. On Il rs-
ing vote the bill was passed, l94 to
Al.
II. l42, amending an act incorporating
u city and town of ST. Adams.
II. $50, an act relating to the invest
ment Of funds by executors, administra-
tors and trustees whose trust estates are
under the control of the probate court.
Special Order.
/ Committee of the whole, on ii. All,
relating to the regulation OF trade and
| the inspection Of weights and measures.
Commissioner Henry of the weights
and measures department appeared and
told of the conditions prior to 1908, lead
| ing up to the enactment of the law
creating the department. He stated that
on the first inspection, that "a per cent.
Of all scales, weights and measures were
unfit for use; that all the scales in the
state could not be inspected once IN each
year, but they should be inspected az
near often as that as possible. lie said
that the commissioners and four assist
ants were doing the work of the DEPART
ment; that prior to 1911 there were no
/ accepted standards of weights and meas
ures in the state, and referred to the
investigation of the department by the
| Senate in 1912; and insisted that five
men were necessary TO do the business
Of the department.
/ Mr.. Eaton Of Woodstock Intercepted
| Mr.. Henry for an estimate for continuing
! the work of the department for the next
| two years, on the lines the. commission
referred to. Mr.. Henry's reply was that
| If he had more money that he could put
on another man and give the state bet
| ter and more prompt service Mr.. Jones
| of Shrewsbury wanted to know what
| the per cent. of scales found wrong were
| against the merchants, but the ccmmis-
soner could not tell; in reply to ques-
| ton as to what actual aud necessary
expenses" meant in his case, that there
was no specified limit.
| 1t developed that Burlington was the
| only place in the state having com.
/ pIete set OF standards, In reply 70 a
| request from Mr.. Moore Of Ludlow for
i summary OF the cost OF each inspec-
| tor, Mr.. Henry said that his personal
| expenses outside OF salary from March |,
| 1918, to Feb !, 1914 were 81 ,8324s
with s4SS.77 for clerical assistance. OF
! his deputies, Mr.. Atwood cost Sl,9I045;
| G.. +. Henry cost 81 SOFAS; II. NJ. Allen
| cost 81 .934. 20; Milford Sowles cost ST.
| 1884, r. j. Moore cost for about a
month. S24070; a total cost OF 81 1852
In reply to an inquiry. the commission
er said that he did outside work when
| the opportunity offered, but could not
! tell how much he had done until he con
suited his reports, which were in Ches-
! ter. He stated that he had no inspec-
| tors who had ever had any previous ex-
perience, but that every man had to be
educated after being hired.
Mr.. Eaton of Woodstock tried to get
an estimate Of the total cost OF the de-
partment, but Mr.. Henry replied by say
ing that $1,000 per more than he was
now getting would run the department.
| Mr.. Foster of Sudbury quoted from a
! circular letter sent out by Commission
er Henry: "Now comes Ii. AL, and our
taxpayers are asked by those opposed
to honest weights and measures, to pat
for a third investigation OF the need o.
weights and measures department. For
economy's sake, please act right away
and get every man and woman to voice
his or her protest 10 II. All, 70 every
body be or she knows OF knows OF go
the legislature, 50 that this time public
Fopinion will b. SO evident that We wont
have 10 hash this matter over every ses.
SION
In his defense Of his letter. Mr.. Henry
said he wrote II because he thought that
honest weights and measures would Je
abolished.
Mr.. Pitkin Of Marshfcld asked tn,
commissioner If placing the department
in the department 81 agriculture wound
abolish honest weights and measures
aud Mr.. Henry said no. Mr.. Henry said
that his inspectors were on the roai
practically All the time.
Mr. Lund 81 Canaan asked Mr., Henry
II the discrepancies Mr.. Henry had re-
ferred to IN various parts Of his remarks
we're the result Of dishonest practices;
Mr. Henry did not think - in al case-
ne lid not think that inspection q APP
paratus once year would make deal.
ers honest.
Mr. Pitkin asked il the five commits
sioncrs had practically covered the com
mcrcial part of the state during The
past year. Mr. Henry said that only
about two-thirds of The state had been
taken care Of.
Mr.. Black Of Burlington moved that
the committee rise, and the motion was
carried Mr. Eoote stated that the com
mittee on the whole, having under con-
sideration II. All, had arrived al no con.
elusion.
Mr. Miller Of Bethel. IN = vigorous
speech. defended the department and
urged IL retention iu its present form.
Mr stone Of Woodforf told " tie sar-
ings effected by the department IN The
matter 81 butter alone in and around
Bennington county.
Mr. Foote 81 Cornwall said that W.
Henry had proved ~ d. own admis
sious that the business could r. nm
- n. All proposed. Ne called atten-
tion 10 tie fact that this was the only
state where the business was carried on
a. u Is.
NIr Moore % Ludl0w thought tlat
the depart mont bad been nm honestly
and efficiently. and que-ied # the inter-
csts 81 the state would be conserved ~
tic proposed change
Mr. DnIl1is 81 Troy thought That The
uruuosed change would result % tnfl
cheney unless tte various towns provided
themselves with the ue0essarF etHr
ment. 81 q barge rvpcnefs p advocated
s-.frr ffr department distinct
NJ Soule ct Aihrrg arTsnaef - h'.s
urd Mr. Hu ~ Waterbury moved tnet
fgeas Isl Ht-s= II