Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1919-03-20

or not. So that it 10 wholly within tn,
discretion of the court; and in the pc.
tition which is filed asking for the ap'
pointment OF an administrator thu
names of the interested parties. the
were any minors their names woul.
be before the court on this petition. Sc
that the judiciary committee felt thai
there was not much danger from tn
source of which the senator from
1Aroostook speaks. We felt as though
it could be safely left to the discre
ton of the court to>take care Of TIKI
minors in all cases.
This is a simple statement as to VIII;
the judiciary committee reported as 1
did. leave the matter to the wisdom
of the Senate.
Mr.. GUKNEY Of Cumberland: Mr.
President, may ask the senator from
Aroostook. through the Chair. whethe.
or not under this bill it Is not possible
for a judge of probate. by whom tn,
facts are not entirely understood, t.
appoint dissolute husband administra.
tor of a wife's estate, with whom hi
has not been living. without any notice
at all?
The PRESIDENTS: Will the senator
from Penobscot answer the senator
from Cumberland. through the Chair?
Mr.. DEARTH: Mr.. President, it is
certainly possible; of course if any mar
has discretionary power lodged in
him he can act within the limits OF
that discretionary power. But we dc
not assume that a man holding the
position of a judge of probate will &C,
unwisely or without proper discretion.
The PRESIDENT: Does that an
swer the question of the senator from
Cumberland
Mr.. GURNEY: Yes, Mr.. President
l would like to ask the senator fur
Their Observation-Disclosures or not il
might not be possible in one of the
larger counties for q Judge who was
approached by a plausible man who
represented that he was a man en-
titled to the probate Of will, and
not even living with his wife, or dis
solute-it being impossible or i'm
practicable for the judge to know that
mans standing in the community
for judge to appoint such a man
without opportunity of investigation;
whereas if the matter was advertised
it would be brought to the atten-
ton of the heirs and they would have
the opportunity to bring to the at
tention of the court the mans unfit
ness?
Mr.. DEARTH: Those things are
possible. Now l do not want the
Senate to feel that I am trying to
defend the report of the judiciary
committee. l am simply explaining
the view that they took Of it, and as
L stated, I do not care to discuss it
| do not feel as though there is very
much danger from any source.
Mr.. DAVIES of Cumberland: The
question. Mr.. President, before the
Senate at the present time relates tc
An Act to amend Section 20 Of Chap
ter 6S Of the Revised Statutes con-
corning the granting of administra-
ton without bond under certain con.
ditions.
Section 20 as amended by the act
now before the Senate would read a.
follows: "A Judge Of probate may
in his discretion grant administra-
ton with the will annexed. upon ar
estate, to the widow or widower OF
next to kin. without requiring bonds
for the faithful discharge of the du
ties of the trust, etc" The law as il
now is reads to the widow but not tc
tie widower. This act aims to insert
in the law the words cor widower. OF
next to kim" and without requiring
bonds for the faithful discharge OF
the duties Of the trust, whenever all
persons interested in said estate WAC
are Of full age and legal capacity
other than creditors, assent in writ
ing thereto.
The only change made in the Law
by the act now before the Senate
adds to Section 20 Of Chapter IS the
words "or widower". There is nc
other change. Now the reason for il
was, Mr.. President, the committee
felt that that was matter which
could very safely be left within the
discretion of the judge OF probate
SO many matters come within that
discretion. Mr.. President, that is
within the discretion of the Judge o.
probate, we felt we could very safe
ly and properly leave that to him.
Mr.. GURNEY: Mr.. President
may l ask the senator from Cumber'
land. through the Chair. whether OF
not he states correctly that that i:
the only change? You will notice
that it strikes out in the sixth ant
seventh lines of Section 20 the fol.
lowing words. which is an objection
able feature: provided that public
notice shall first be given upon tht
petition for such appointment" Will
the senator tell me whether or MOI
that is not an important change II
the first place.
Mr.. DAVIES: That is true, Mr.
President, but it did not strike M
that it is of any Importance, pro
vided that public notice shall first bt
given upon the petition for such ap-
pointment" No individual will GER
tainly have any objection to- that
when public notice Is given. Indeed
that seems to me to establish my pc.
sition rather than to take from it, fol
certainly there could be no objection
to public notice on the part of any
body.
Mr.. GURNEY: That eliminates it
Mr.. DAVIES: l do not think so.
Mr.. GURNEY: 1t was provided
that public notice first be given. and
YOU now fix it so that notice shall not
be given.
MIR. DAVIES: I do not understand
the act in that way.
Mr.. WALKER OF Somerset: Mr.
President, the argument of the sena-