Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-08-10

THE lottery people are in desperate
straits in Louisiana. A ground-swell Of
public opinion warns them of storms and
breakers to Glow. By death they have
lost Senator, and their two-thirds power
will be broken should the Legislature
again assemble The bill submitting the
lottery scheme to vote appropriates
money; it therefore was of the class that
requires the Governors approval. He re-
fused to give it, and now the Secretary of
State is to be forbidden by Court mandate
from promuigating as law that which
lacks an essential element Of validity-the
sanction of the Executive. The Secretary
of State is reported as gravely doubling
whether he can by proclamation order an
election the Executive forbids. The doubt
of the Secretary amounts to a signal pre-
liminary triumph of the anti-.ottery party,
which has behind it not only the Louisi-
ana Governor, but the moral sense of nine
tenths of the millions of our population.
A HITCH IN STREET IMPROVEMENT.
There appears to be hitch in the
street improvement matter that is very
unpleasant and threatens i'll. 1t should
be Strengthened out speedily.
When the city last winter was land
locked, fenced in by impossible streets, the
one pressing demand of the people was for
effective action to prevent the recurrence
of such a disaster, for it was nothing less
than positive disaster to be cut off from
the trade Of the country.
The proposition to have the city pay
one fourth of the cost of street improve
ment prevailed at the polls by an over
whelming majority, because the people
wanted two or three, but certainly two
streets made good solid thoroughfares to
Thirty-frst street. 1t was mainly for that
purpose that the RECORD UNION gave the
bond proposition its earnest and pnceasing
support
Now comes plan to make l street to
Thirty-frst one of the trade arteries. The
total cost will be S56,S21. OF this one
fourth will be S1l, 705, which the city is
asked to bear. But Mr.. Trustee McLaugh-
lin interposes with the argument that it
is too much Of the 100000 for the city to
expend upon single street.
II .I,ot laI c4r nc
are what is needed, and that the 100000
should not be absorbed by one section oil
the city in a gravel and asphaltum road,
We DO not for one moment question Mr.
McLaughlin's sincerity in this, but we do
take issue with his judgment.
The improvement Of no street from the
business section to the city's east line is, or
can be, sectional improvement. The ben
eft of such work inuies TO the whole city,
but to improve block or two here and a
block or two there, while commendable,
will not give us what the people voted for
through highways, affording free ingress
TO the city.
If 1t should happen that the 100000
should be expended in small section work,
and no through lines be completed this
season, the city would not be relieved of
the mud wall surrounding it, barring out
the people who desire to come to and trade
in this market.
Moreover, it was never intended that
the 100000 should be Withheld to be dis
tributed over long period. On the con-
trary, it was thoroughly well understood
that at least two good avenues clear
through the city to its eastern bound
should be improved. Now when the
people come forward and propose to pay
tbree-fourths of the cost of making these
streets easy Of travel, how can the city in
GOOD conscience rebuke them for doing the