Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1917-03-30

I IAiT Trial ana II was TOO early 10 begin
amending. Try it two more years, then
| if 1t needs changing. come here and
amend it for the purpose of lettering
It
Rep. Wilson Of Portland spoke at
length in opposition to any change
| which would give the injured employee
i, the right to choose his own doctor or
hospital. citing from the laws Of many
states to show the systems there in use.
He felt that as no other State had gone
as far as the proposed law here in
Maine it was not the proper time to
make such change here.
| Rep. Holbrook of Brooks thought that
1t would do no good nor any great harm.
After discussion as to the meaning and
application of certain sections Of the
old law, Rep. Barnes of Houlton in
quired If anyone wished their wives re-
| stricted to the calling of corporation
contract doctor at perhaps 81 per head
call or to the doctor of their choice,
| in case of injury to the husband.
Rep. Jordan was glad so many things
were being done for the laboring man.
He knew the committee was fair and
| impartial but he didn't want anyone to
| think the law couldn't be interfered with
for its betterment. Rep. Descoteaux
said that two years ago the present law
was passed with the understanding it
| was a starter to be amended <lis year
and until it was worked into a good
law and he thought it time to begin
The question of indefinite postopne-
ment resulted on rising vote 81 to 81,
and on motion of Rep. oawyer the bill
was passed to be engrossed, in nom
concurrence with the Senate.
The committee report Ought not to
pass on resolve providing for the pay
ment of a bounty on bears was on mo-
ton of Rep Flint of Monsoon accepted.
The majority report. ought not to
pass. and minority report, ought to
pass. from the committee on sea and
shore fisheries on act to amend Section
80 and SO. Chapter As, Revised Stat
utes. relating to the measurement Of
Holsters was taken up and Rep. Goldth-
wait moved the adoption of the minority
| report. He said we need change in
the present law because of the dep:e-
ton OF the lobster supply, the funda-
mental errors in the present law and
| the fact that the proposed law was
based on the very best and strongest
foundation yet found. The lobster like
coming at least scarce
The United States reports showed
that in the past 20 years the catch had
been greatly falling off In 1900 it
averaged SO per pot; in 1913 but 80
Maine reports showed about the same
TIL Massachusetts catch in the past 10
Years had fell off from about $50 Ono
to 426,000 pounds. The fisherman knows
hnft
man. He has been rallied at and abused.
but the speaker thought he was a re-
markably fine and able fellow, consid-
ering the laws with which we had ham,
pered him. No fisherman would say
that with the equipment and methods
of the past Is or 20 years he can more
than make a bare existence
Rep. Harrington at this point was
called t. the chair
Rep. Goldthwait said the present
10 1-2-inch law had been passed to
prevent the Gamers from destroying
the Holsters. but that no legislation
had been attempted for the conserva-
ton of the lobster through the biologi-
cal conditions and that the proposed
change was for that very purpose. The
growth Of the lobster was slow and
the seed Holsters, which carried their
seeds for months were valued accord
ing to age and size, hence a big one
was worth much more than several
small ones and it was imperative to
return to the water the largest breed
ers. The double-guaged law was de-
signed to help this protection by max
ing the measurement the best for sell
ing and would prohibit the selling Of
any others. The opposition all arose
from commercial sources. The propos-
ed law would not injure the fisherman,
who observed the present law, but
would help them.
He spoke of the deliberations in the
various states in regard to the propos-
ed uniformity Of laws and believed
that this proposed law should be en-
acted. He thought that if anything
could be done to save this great indus
try this law would do it,
Rep. Harmon Of Stonington believed
that the State should conserve and
preserve one of the greatest industries
of the State and though the double
guage law may be correct in theory it
was impracticable in act. He then gave
lengthy description of the double
guage lobster law and what it would
mean in the State, if put into use; he
read statistics from the United States
Fish Commission to support his argu-
ment and said in 1916 that 100000
pounds of lobster, valued at S2,22S. 600
were caught and sold in this State
and outside, which showed that the in
dustry was rapidly increasing at the
rate Of approximately 100000 pounds
nor