St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1884-03-21
OFFICIAL.
Proceedings Of the Common Council
Regular Meeting.

ST. PAUL, March 1s, 1884.
President Allen in the chair
Present-Ald. Dowlan, Fischer, Otis,
Smith, Cornish, johnson, Van Slyke, Starkey,
St. Peter, Mr.. Presidential.
COMMUNICATIONS.
From His Honor the Mayor-Veto-
To the Honorable the Common Council OF
the City of st. Paul:
GENTLEMEN: / herewith respectfully re-
turn without my approval that certain ordi-
nance passed at your last meeting, wherein
permission is granted to Messrs. Griggs 81
Foster to erect upon the site of the building
owned by them and lately destroyed by fire,
on the corner of Broadway and Pine streets,
a similar structure to the one so destroyed.
The locality where it is proposed to erect
this structureis, as you are aware, in the bus
mess centre of the city, and is being rapidly
built up with large and expensive warehouses.
Immediately contiguous to it are the ware
houses of several railroad companies which
are constantly filled with valuable merchan-
disc.
The completion of the Third street bridge,
which event is expected to take place IN the
near future will, in my opinion, give such an
impetus to the Improvements on lower Third
street, that we may expect to see the same
completely built up within very short time.
and am strongly of the opinion that the
existence of a building of the size and char
acter of the one proposed to be built under
this ordinance will seriously tend to retard
such improvements and cause other
property holders to hesitate before building.
The principal objection, however, which L
have to this ordinance is that it is practically
a species Of class legislation. The ordinance
establishing the fire limits is necessarily
stringent one, and bears harshly upon
property holders within its limits who are
thereby compelled to erect buildings of a more
expensive material, or, in case of their in
ability so to do they must either dispose of their
property or allow it to remain unimproved.
But such ordinances have been uniformly
sustained by the courts, and in modern
experience have been found to be absolutely
necessary for the general welfare.
This prohibition is undoubtedly great
hardship, and that being the case it seems to
me it should be borne by all alike, i. e. those
affected by it should share equally in its
burdens, and any exception to it would pro-
duce the injustice of exempting one or
particular class of persons from its operation
while the greater number were compelled to
submit to its inconvenience.
The destructive effects of fire are so
well known that it is unnecessary to advert
to them. We have spent and are spending
immense sums of money upon our fire de-
partment and water supply, and other rene
dial and preventive measures; If the ordi
nary dangers to be anticipated from this
element with our present fire limits and
building ordinance in force, are SO great as
to require the expenditure of such sums for
further protection against it, it does seem to
me that we are hardly warranted in increas-
ing the peril by permitting the practical re-
peal of the building ordinance and the result
ing erection of structures Of this character
which must be admitted to be not only
dangerous to themselves but to all property
in their immediate vicinity The
very building which it is intended
to replace is ample evidence
of this 1t was built in 1881 and burned with
its entire contents early in 1884, considera-
bly, injuring far more valuable structure in
its vicinity, and am informed by persons
present on that occasion, that, had it not
been for the favorable condition of the
weather, conflagration of almost incalcula-
BILE damage, involving the railroad warehouses
and other buildings in that vicinity would
have resulted.
1t is further claimed that the erection of
building of this character will result in large
ly increasing the rates ofinsurance within the
large radius of territory in question. 1t seems
to me that this would be an additional injus-
tiee to those of our citizens who have already
erected buildings in conformity to the
fire ordinance and to such others as are about
to do so, who would thus be compelled to
pay increased rates of insurance because of
the noncompliance by others with the pro-
visions of the law which they had been COM
PEELED to obey.
10 1-;fl 4ho4T
else the veto power as to any of the proceed
ings of your honorable body, but as I am
charged with the duty of affirmatively ap-
proving or non-approving this ordinance, it
is upon me to perform my duty in that re-
gard according to my best judgment, and in
the exercise of that Iregret that l cannot ap-
prove the ordinance in question.
| do this with the less reluctance because
an error upon my part in this matter can be
readily rectified by your honorable body,
while an error Of mine in approving the Or
dinance will place the matter beyond recall.
All which is respectfully submitted.
c. D. O'Brien, Mayor.
March IA, 1884.
Accepted.
The foregoing was accompanied by
protests, which were read, from E. w.
Winter, assistant president Chicago, st. Paul,
Minneapolis d Omaha, and T. F. Cakes,
vice president Of the Northern Pacific Rail-
road company and Farwell, Ozmun & Jack
son and others, against permission being
given for the re-erection of the warehouse
referred to.
Upon the conclusion of the reading Of the
foregoing, the ordinance referred to in the
communication Of the mayor was read.
Aid. Otis moved that the vote by which
said ordinance was passed be reconsdered.
The motion prevailed by the following
vote:
Yeas-Ald. Dowlan, Fischer, Otis, Smith,
Cornish, Johnson, Van Slyke, Starkey, st.
Peter, Mr.. Presidential.
The ordinance being put on its passage the
veto of the Mayor to the contrary notwith-
standing, was adopted and passed by the fol-
lowing vote.
Yeas-Ald. Dowlan, Fischer, OTIS Smith,
Cornish, johnson, Starkey, Mr.. President
IS.
Nays-Ald. Van slyke, st. Peter-2.
From Judson & Brack-
For permission to remove frame building
in fire limits.
Committee on Fire department.
From Edward Lott
Claim for damage to his property caused
by the construction of sewer on De Bow
street.
Board of Public Works.
From G. j. Loveland-
For the remission of fine imposed for vio-
lating ordinance relating to employment Of
fees.
Committee on Claims.
From Magdalena Ruben and others
Protest against the opening of Oakland
street through blocks eight and twelve, Ter
race Park addition.
Committee on streets
From Robert Seeger-
For the remission of fine imposed on him as