Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1923-05-05
Saturday, May S, 1923.
at is a great folly to run away from
faets"-John Wanamaker.
GOVERNOR BAXTER REVIEWS

the public that he was right and
practically all others who had any
thing to do with it were wrong.
In his opening he says: This Ken
nebec charter did not escape my at
tention". The idea conveyed-and we
assume intended to re ccnveyed-is
that he was so alert and watchful
that no undetermined attack on the
peoples property could escape his
notice.
This is a fair inference is it not?
Now what are the facts? The
Journal is informed. on what we be-
lieve creditable authority. that before
the Kennebec bill was introduced in
the first weeks Of the session. copy
of it was taken to the Governor and
he thought such were needed; that he
had the bill in his possession for
week and made no suggestions.
49, This has not been denied so we as
sumo it is true, although we think it
conveys a meaning altogether diff
ferent from that conveyed by the
Governor in the words: did not es-
cape my attention. or by his state
ment that he had brief but guarded
conversation regarding it with cer-
tain lobbyists who called upon me-.
Did that guarded conversation con-
tain any hint at the leasing policy?
From what we have been able to
learn of the conditions which obtain
ed during the S1st Legislature we are
of the opinion that had the Governor
at the beginning proposed lease Of
the State lands the proposition would
have been listened to. We may be
wrong in this assumption but we
were convinced the Legislature wish
ed to have the best possible arrange
ment made and that a Governor
wishing to cooperate would be listen
ed to respectfully. We also got the
impression that it, was a Legislature
DESTROYS Of advice and information
but resentful of dictation from any
source. This was indicated by the
final disposition of the matter. The
Slst Legislature did not develop con-
spicuous political ambitions among
its members and did not seem to take
kindly to being used for that purpose
by outsiders.
This OF course is, but an impression.
II came from acquaintance with the
doings of that body and the members.
II does not come from the so-called
interests. In all this discussion the
Journals opinion has been it's own.
No one has dictated it or attempted
to do so. Nor do we believe any other
newspapers opinion was dictated by
selfish motives to the cetriment Of the
public.
From the first we have opposed
State management of our water re-
sources. Wherever the State happens
to own any rights affected by the de-
velopment Of such resources-this is
the situation with respect to the Ken
nebec development but, we UNDER
stand, applies to few other places in
the State-the leasing policy should
b q good one II consistent and at
fotding assurance with respect to de-
finiteness that would invite pri-
vate capital to undertake the work
needing to be done. But State own
ership and management we believe
Objectionable from every point of
view.
We are little curious to know just
what the average reader Of the Cow
ernor's statement is to conclude about
the Governors confidence IN the wis.
dom Of the people. 1t is plain as a
pikestaff that he thinks the people
were very unwise or grossly deceived
In their choice Of Legislature-the
speople did choose the Legislature you
know. at the direct primaries and
without dictation by the interests in
party caucuses. Then he suddenly
changes and thinks them wise indeed
lbecause they endorse his proposal for
q teferendum. But when it came to
fixing the date Of the referendum he
,seems to have lost all confidence in
atheir eagerness to take the matter in.
ito their own hands; he concluded it
twould not do to let them vote on
swhat they were demanding in March
1923 until eighteen months later in
September 1924!
! Surely such conditions do not sus-
Stain any argument for State manage
ement. We might sometime have an
Sunwise shepherd.
/. Rather a ludicrous situation, isn't
.it?. Perhaps the Governor may yet
sfind 1t worth smile. Meanwhile he
may think it worth while to correct
this statement in his proclamation:
FAN added reason tor postponing the
referendum until 1924 was that the
.people Of the State thereby would be
saved the heavy expense Of a special
election. not less than $4,000.
Now. as a matter Of fact, hasn't
sthere got to be this year a special
referendum on the 4S-hour law, when
Fhe cost WOULD have been no greater
Hor having a referendum on the water
STORAGE proposition than would have
peen the case we're it postponed an.
pther year? 1t would cost not cent
more to have had these two questions
I
s'7a