Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1923-03-22

q State OF Maine building on the
grounds Of the Eastern States Agri-
cultural and Industrial exposition,
Inc. at West Springfield Massa-
chusetts.
Resolve. providing for aid in the
payment Of premiums awarded by the
Houlton Agricultural Society y
Resolve. in favor OF Wilmore
QuimbX Of Haynesyille for State
Pension, .,@+', :,
ORDERS Of the Day
The PRESIDENT: This brings us
to the specially assigned matters
for today. and the Chair recognizes
Mr.. Wilson Of Aroostool1, on report
OF tho committee on agriculture.
ought to pass, on H. 2os, Resolve pro-
vidinK for an annual display Of the
agricultural products. and resources
of the state Of Maine At the Eastern
states Exposition. -
The pending question 10 on the
acceptance OF the report Of the com.
mittee. - ~
Mr.. WILSON: MIR. President. 1
move that the report Of the commit
first reading. r.
The motion was agreed to and the
bill was given its first reading.
-
The PRESIDENTS, The Chair
recognizes the same senator on re-
port of. the committee on agriculture,
ought to pass. on H. 215. Resolve
making an appropriation for the sup
port and maintenance Of the State
Experiment Station '''
The pending question is on the .ac-
ceptance Of the report of the COM
mittee.
Mr.. WILSON: Mr.. President. !
move that the report be accepted and
the bill given it's first reading.
The motion was agreed to and the
bill was given it's first reading. r
The PRESIDENT: The next mat
ter specially assigned for today is
relating to the kennebec Reservoir
Company.
The Chair recognizes the senator
from Lincoln. Mr.. Clark
Mr.. CLARK: Mr.. President, this
bill was introduced by the senator
from Somerset. Mr. Smith. and l yield
the floor to him at this time.
Mr.. SMITH: Mr.. President, I
move tina: this bill become law not
withsta 1dinE the Governors veto.
Mr.. BREWSTER: Mr.. Presi1 dent
we are met here. this morning. / take
it. to decide whether the efforts OF
| the most formidable lobby which has
gathered within these walls within
recent years has been successful
The question is whether or not the
charter. which it is proposed tosgrant
the kennebec Reservoir Company and
define the powers thereof shall be
passed. l take it no other question
! is before us at this time.
The proponents of private develop
ment of our natural resources. those
who sincerely advocate such a solu-
ton Of the problem of development
OF our natural resources are faced in
considering this act, which grants
these rights to seven private in
dividuals. only one of whom I be-
lieve is resident of this State
those persons, and l believe there
are such in this hall sincerely believ-
ing in private development-are
faced with two difficulties.
First. when the Supreme Court OF
this State in 1919 laid down the
proposition that the State itself could
not develop the water storage for the
| benefit of its water powers. it also
laid down the corollary OF tina,
proposition that the State could not
to create water storage for the bene-
MT OF their water powers. There
fore. II this is an act to grant the
right of development OF water stor-
age for the benefit Of water powers
1t Is an unconstitutional exercise OF
! our powers and in defiance of the
plain power laid down by the Su-
preme Court in 1919. The only way
in which this Constitutional inhibi.
ton is avoided is by the fact that ir
TINS charter there, are inserted GER
tain incidental log driving rights
not. as ] understand it. in any wa,
| concerned with the main purpose OF
the bill. not essential to its carrying
out, and not essential for the con-
quot or log-driving upon the kenne.
bee river as it exists today
1t is eHact1y-to support this
proposition because of it's log driving
! features. is exactly as though thi.
| state and this Legislature should
construct this million dollar dam and
by building a driveway across its tor
support IL as within the bridge build.
| ing powers Of this State There is
exactly as much connection between
a bridge across the Dead River al
! that point which should consist of a
concrete dam with driveway across
the top-there is exactly as much
connection between such a PROPOSE.
ton and the proposition which we
| have here today. so far as our con.
stitutfonal limitations are con-
| cerned. as there is between the log
| driving features of this proposition
and the great storage dam for the
| beneflt OF the water powers which il
| is proposed to build. If the PROPOSE.
| ton for the State to build such q
dam IS bridge should be suggested
here, heaven would be rent with the
cries of those who would say we
were avoiding the Constitution. and
vet it is exactly what they ask us tc
do here today when they ask us te
grant this charter for the develop.
! ment of water storage on the Ken.
nebec for the benefit of it's water
| powers. and the only constitutional
| support they have for such a PROPOSE.
ton is by inserting certain incidental
and by no means necessary log-driv.
| ing rights in that charter. That is
the proposition. gentlemen. and l ask
the leader Of the Legislative agents
supporting this measure If wa.
right in my analysis OF that measure
after l spoke the other day. and he
said I was substantially correct. II
seems to me we must seriously regard
the constitutional limitations which
| the Supreme Court has laid down
| upon our acts and not evade IT. by
any such subterfuEe as IL necessary
to support this pending measure
| That 10 one.
| The other proposition Is very well
| expressed in the editorial by the dis.
tinguished editor Of the Lewiston
Journal. which we find upon our
desks this morning. a most splendid
and most clarifying statement OF
one OF the most serious issues which
we have faced in this Legislature l
can subscribe to every word which