Year: 1877

|


| The admirable inaugural address of Mayor
Butler deserves the careful perusal of every
citizen of Portland. The felicity of its diction
| and the interesting nature of the subjects of
| which it treats will secure for it wide and


eager audience. Very properly the Mayor


prefaces the consideration of city affairs with
some general remarks on the powers and du-
ties of municipalities. The points presented


are as old as municipal government itself, but


they have been sadly overlooked in this coun-


try of late, and need again to be brought to
the notice of men. Especially timely is the


rebuke of municipal extravaganza, and the
| reminder that men will do acts, and advocate
| and vote for measures, officially as members
of a corporation, which in their private capac-
ity they would scorn to do or promote. The
strange and paradoXical idea has obtained OF
late that man by assuming public response


bty acquits himself of all responsibility, and
to this idea more perhaps than to any other


is due the grievous errors which af1ct all
governments, from national to town. Atten-
ton is wisely called to the Infringement upon


vested rights 20 which absolute majority rule


always tends, and the good old rule of paying
as we go is specially emphasized.


That portion of the message relating par


tlcularly to the current affairs of the CITY is in
effect commentary upon the pro Slem show
to save $150,000 year." The solution which
the Mayor offers will, we apprehend, prove
highly satisfactory to Taxpayers. The bur-
den thrown upon the city by the default in
the payment of interest by the Portland &
Ogdensburg and Portland & Roshester


railroads can only be fully met by in
crease OF taxation or by reduction of cur
rent expenses. For obvious reasons it would
De neither just nor wise to raise the taxes
above the already high existing rate Recourse
| must then be had to the other rem
edy. The Mayor estimates that $780,
900 of the $150,000 which must an
nually be raised to meet the interest
on the railroad debt can be provided for thus:
$4,000 will be saved in interest by the retire.
ment of city bonds which have matured and
have been paid within the last fifteen months
by the re-arrangement and reduction Of the
sinking fund, under the recent change of the
ordinance relating to that subject, it is esti-
mated that 100000 may be saved; by enforc-
ing more thoroughly equality and uniformity


In valuation, by relinquishing the practice of
aoating taxes on slight pretences, and by
economy in purchasing supplies, at least
Sl0,O0O more may be gained for the treasury.
Still there is balance of 100000 to be met.
and this balance can be met in no other way
than by reLrenchment pure and simple in our
annual municipal expenditures. Without
going into particulars the message suggests
that by proper and discriminating reduction


IN salaries and appropriations and the stop
page of small leaks the necessary sum can be
met. The position taken in relation to the
railroads is the same as that held in the re-
port of the commission, and has already been
endorsed by the city. In conclusion the
Mayor makes well considered remarks about
the Police Department, the Board of Over
seers OF the Poor and the Board of Health,
which will command general approval.


THE United States District Court of Indi-
diana has rendered decision which covers
the important question as to the status of
| policy in the courts of State where the
insurance company OF another State has no
authority under the law to transact business
within it's borders. The facts are briefly
these: The assignee of the Winneskeik In
surance company of Illinois, sued man in
| Indiana for the amount of an unpaid pre-
| MUM note, given by defendant to an agent
of the company in his own town, in pay
| ment for insurance. The facts of the signing
| of the note and reception of the policy were
| not denied by the defendant, nor that the
company had not complied with the laws of
| Indiana in regard to corporations by the
plaintiff, which was the ground of defence.
The court held that the agent of the company
| might be prosecuted and punished for violat-
ing the law, but that the contract entered
| into was good in law, and should be paid
for in fact. The case stood as it would if the
defendant had procured bis insurance person
ally in Illinois. The defendant urged in re-
ply that even if it was regarded as an Illinois
contract, il was violation OF the law of In
| diana, and could not be enforced in that
State. The court decided that it is not COM


petent for the legislature Of Indiana to declare
| that the citizens of the State shall not be al


lowed to make such contracts as they please
for the insurance of their property, whether
| it be within or without the State.