Evening journal., 1889-05-03


the bill passed there. nor ia the Senate
when IL passed that body.
am inf rmed by Senator that the
speaker told him that when the bill came
up in the Senate for iinal passage he read
its title aloud and also stated that 1t re-
pealed chapter l79. volume Is, and that
counsel for the Union Bank were present
but 10 his surprise raised no objection; !;
That he knew what the amendment ulu
and what law it repealed.
II. W. MacIntire, who was reaulhe
clerk at the time in the Senate, lnIorus
me that he remembered distinctly reau
ing the bill with the Amendment anu
confirms the speakers recollection lnav
counsel for the Union Bank was IN tne
Senate at the time. ia
II will therefore be seen, that did
no more with this bin than is constantly
done with numerous other bills before
the Legislature. viz Took II to mem
bar of Tho House aud asked his attention
then did the same in the Senate maze
no misrepresentations to any member q
either body
some Of the Union Bank representa-
tives saw called them out of the respec-
tive bouses or sent for them TO come
ont in order to have them away when
this amendment was passing. lhe only
connection | had with calling anybody
was this | went into the House about
II o'clock. showed proposed bill to a
member. said TO him | was afraid tue
Senate would do nothing Tor me- eA-
plained 10 him il was 20 repeal the act
which the Union Bank through Mr.
Salisbury and numerous other law
yers was fighting and asked him 70
assist me. Ii was unnecessary Tor me 70
have bothered with this last bill because,
although did not know IL at the time
tie amendment first offered in the House
had as / have since learned. already
passed the Senate The! member thus
spoke 70 Immediately sent the House
page FOR Mr. Salisbury aud when he
came after some consultation. said mem
her said he preferred NOT 20 take hold Of
tie ustter then got Mr. Gray con.
sant to push ID if there WAS any chance.
theurh as 30 told me il was rather late.
As have alrc2iy said [ was AZ this time
unaware of rhe passaEe by the Seuate Ot
the amendment. Even Y the said
amendment hAd uct az che time passed
the Senate u WAS perfectl7 legitimate
fo- ME al enter as many different bills as
[ pleased 1ad Il the numerous Union
Bank attorneys fought the wrong bill
rhas was not ny lookout I. Or others
fsr ma bad trisd % employ several
ATTORNEYS te help iu this hght, but
se1ai tbaa ths Union had already en-
ul,ged thsui lf { hai known az the
siraa as row seems s0 BE- the case. that
some 1e lhsse rentisusa would 20 from
one gilee 1a another So wy request
E1lld have isfsd then early iu the ses.
siea -a r. aame
an surry 1his lLst bin was introduced
1 tle ElHsH. eecarsa t- gave great
tsal af muuls 90 same people and was
entirely unnecessl-Y as the one l was
-uruu,u lrlv interested iu had alreaGy
-nssed THIS WAS a GEht made on the
ga.s gf tina Street and Sewer Department
-1 centred s1eir oWu funds They were
.lrsu11gslr opposed by the Union Bank
lhroC-a o. cEerfuI influence and numer
GUS representatives, the object of saic
S4nk being 90 compel these men wh'
gave 81. 900 security te put the funds OF
iEe Department the Union Bank. Why
this bank should claim the right to dt
this 90 not think any one can satisfac
t9riiy explain.
50 far as the City Council is concerned
the repeal Of the above mentioned sup
plement does not touch its funds or am
thing over which it has control. The BIZ
for that purpose as / have above stated
was killed in the Senate and | do no
now think it could ever have passe,
either branch Of the Legislature. Tn,
bill repeating the supplement whicl
was introduced in the Senate by me
would in my opinion have passed th
Legislature if could have gotten it ou
Of the Senate committee Although no
present in either house at its time o
passage. am informed by gentlemen
who could not be mistaken that the sup
plement in question was regularly callel
up read, voted for upon yea and nal
/ call and passed.
The above is the history of this case Sc
far as my connection Herewith is con
cerned.
LEWIS C. VANDEGRIFT