Year: 1870

Remarks OF Mr.. Hartman OF Belfast,
IN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,, March ls,


IN favor OF bill act additional to chapter As of
the revised statutes, concerning Manufactures.
| Mr. SPEAKER Il believe the principles
embodied in this bill to be right, that this
act if it passes, will mend defect in the
law ; that the spirit of the law already
comes up to the principles of this bill, and
is only defective in the letter-and that it
becomes our privilege, our duty to make
the amendment. The objection urged
against it is that it authorizes the taking
OF property for private purposes.


Let us examine this question for
moment and 90 back to first principles
and see how much we violate private
rights. Titles to lands and real estate gen
orally are derived from the State, and that
title passes from hand to hand by deed,
by inheritance, by possession, &c. The
receiver OF the title by deed obtains no
better title than the State first gives.
Now, when the state grants land to
tenant. it is always understood that it is
granted subject to certain exceptions
which the sovereignty of the State retains
i'll all cases when granted to citizens.
Such are the exceptions and regulations,
that in some cases the grantee is wholly
divested of all title without any considera-
ton whatever being paid back to him,
i'll other cases the law authorizes the
taking of the property and makes careful
provisions for the payment of the value
of it.


All lands granted to citizens are held
liable to taxation, and may be sold for
taxes and the grantee entirely divested of
all right or title to the same without any
/ payment back to him. and the only COM
pensation or benefit he receives or can re-
ceiye is from the sources. where the
amount assessed is expended in sustaining
the peace of the State or the benefit of
ways, or of schools, &c. the grantees
right is sacrificed to the public necessity.


Another mode by which the grantees
title may be diverted without consideration
to him, is by possession-an adverse party
by holding openly notorious adverse
exclusive and uninterrupted possession for
twenty Years becomes sole owner of the
premises by operation of law rs surely as
he could by deed from the original grantee.
There are some exceptions to this general
rule. The public good and necessity re-
quire that land shall be occupied and i'm
proved. The grantee may be assessed
damages under the laws known as the
betterment laws, and made to pay sums
never contracted by him, and in default of
the payment of the same, may be diyested
of his title. This is said to be required by
public justice.


Land may be taken for consideration to
the use of the public for highways if the
public good, the public convenience re-
quires it. 1t may be taken for the same
reasons for the location of school houses.
1t may be taken, overtlowed Tor private
purpOses-ior the erection and use of
mills and manufactures because the public
good requires that water powers shall be
brought into use and occupied. 1t may
be taken for private purposes, for railroads
and for railroad depots. because the public
good requires it, The banks of river or
stream may be overfowed for the public
good, but the water may run to waste
forever without the right to build a dam
in some instances, unless law like this be
passed. | will give you an instance in
point. A gentleman bought small tract
of timber land through which passed
stream with fall suitable for mill site
the premises were purchased with
view to building mill suitable for manu-
featuring the lumber on the premises, but
npon examination of the premises it was
found that at the very place in the stream
most suitable for building the MILL right





which protruded into the stream on both
Sides right at the falls. the line of an ad-
joining owners land Just came to the
stream. exactly where the most convenient
and best place was to put the dam his
neighbor happened to be hostile to him &.
and he was wholly unable to purchase the
right to complete his dam on any reasona-
bic terms and he was compelled at length
to build his dam farther down the stream
where he owned the land on both sides of
it. at much greater expense than would
have been required in the proper place,
by means of which dam he overflowed the
very bank of the stream which he needed
for his da n. Now. he could lawfully use
that premises with water, but not for his
dam, and it seems plain to me that all this
Inconvenience was realized by reason of
a defect i'll the law, which this bill will
carefully cure if enacted.


AS to the other feature of the bill, the
wonderfully increased facility, safety and
convenience recently realized in this coun-
try by the construction of canals or suices
TO conduct and regulate water power
are so plainly self-evident, that there can
not be a doubt but that the public good
requires they should be facilitated, sus-
tained and protected by any reasonable



relating to canals, &c, for manufacturing
purposes, must, it seems to me, commend
itself to every candid well-wisher for pub
lie improvement What Improvement in
the direction and use of water power has
been so completely successful and useful
and safe as the diversion of water by ca
nails and sluices? And are they not a
public benefit The rapid, substantial
and healthy growth of our neighboring
city of Lewiston furnishes fitting refer
ence Why sir, you can survey railroad
track beside river and take what land
you please for u depot. Is that greater
enterprise for the public good than good
manufacturing establishment which brings
the water power of great river into use
Then if both conduce alike TO the public
good, why not give them like privileges?
| think it ought to be done, and that the
passage of this act is a good step in that
direction


This bill does not put the two cases