St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-04-01
The Final Disposition Of the
Bills Will Now Be Upon
Third Reading.
Members Bandy Compliments
and General All-Round
Lively Day.

Oil, ii. +. 901, be recommended to pass.
MIR. Gildea, of Murray, seconded. Mr..
| Tucker called for the reading of the
bill. Reading Clerk Deakin "blew"
himself for thirty minutes, and then
MIR. Searle moved to amend by substi-
tuting for Il. f. 901 his own bill, Il. F.
902.
Mr.. Tucker took up the discussion. He en-
| larged upon the growth of railways in this
state. In 1862 there were only ten miles of
railway in Minnesota; to-day 5, 400 miles of
track were i'll operation. In the early DAYS
OF railroad making large grants of land were
| MADE to corporations. So large were these
grants that in this state 10, 933, 277 acres were
bestowed upon these corporations as grants
| by the general government and the state of
| Minnesota. The value of land exceeded
! $4,000, 900. equal to Sl9344 per mile of track.
half as much as the value of the roads and
their stock. Now the times were different;
the times were close, and the courts and the
| people all insisted that these great corpora
tons, who have really been benefactors TO
our country, shall be properly kept within
Wholesome bounds SO that their true purpose
! IN the interests of all people may be sub
| served. He favored the Currier bill because
| ii did not leaveit permissiye for the railroad
commission to fix the tariff rates, but il is
| made mandatory. The law in Iowa was work
ing to the satisfaction of the people, and ne
| could see no reason why the law would not
be equally good for Minnesota. Mr. Tucker
made an eloquent appeal in behalf of the
| d
| sion upon the members.
MIR. Currier urged the importance of the
| question before them. This was not party
| question; it was not an Alliance, Democratic
or republican question; it was question in
| volving the rights of the people against these
mighty corporations. He denied that the
! Iowa law, upon which his substitute was
based, had stopped railroad building in that
| state, neither had 1t prevented the railroads
from earning dividends or crippled the train
| service: You cannot get fifteen miles any
| where in Iowa from a railroad: OF course the
| conditions of one bill may not be applicable
| to another state, but he appealed to mem
| bers on
The Broad Grounds
! OF justice and equity. Every man should
have his grain hauled at the same rate as an
| other. That was the purport of his bill. 1t
| was what the farmers and people in the coun-
! try districts were clamoring for. They did
not ask for any undue preference over the
| merchants of ST. Paul and Minneapolis; they
simply wanted the privilege of using the nat
ural advantages the Creator had given them.
! MIR. Searle followed. He diu not assume to
| defend the corporations in any sense He
| did not say their charges were not high at
| The present time, and he did not propose to
enter into the question of the freight charges
| and discrimination existing. These questions
were not germane to the subject. The ques-
| ton was, which Of these bills will prevent
| any discrimination? That was the point. Ii
Mr.. Curriers' bill passed, the rates of the rail
roads would be so adjusted that their rev.
| enues would be just as great as they were at
| the present time. The whole question I'M
| der discussion was whether his Mr.. Seare's)
| Interpretation, or rather the Interpretation of
| majority of the railroad committee. relative
| to Mr.. Curriers' position upon the distance
tariff, was correct or not; and his argument
was based solely upon the firm belief that
| the amendment Mr.. Currier proposed to the
present law would work a hardship to the
| outside towns, the agricultural districts in
| the state.
Mr.. Gildea, of Murray, boldly planked his
flag by the Currier substitute. He believed
in a distance tariff, and his reasons for this
was that it would help to build up every part
| of the state. There would be a home market
created all throughout the state, instead of as
now, everything being shipped to and dis
| triDuted from the Twin Cities.
BjOrse's Plain Talk.
Mr.. Bjorge, of Otter fail, made a
| short, plain statement of the side he
| took upon the bill. He said:
If we shall decide upon these bills it seems
to me that we must take into consideration
which one of these bills or what amendments
| are opposed by the railroad companies. We
| know that II. f. 901 has been opposed by the
| companies. and on the other hand that II. F.
| 9J2 has been supported by them. They do
not fight the senate substitute; not at all, and
l am satisfied that is the bill the railroad
| companies have decided to have passed Not
| single petition has been presented against
| il, and for one should not be surprised if
| this was the substitute telephoned to be sent
| to Mr.. Searle at the Ryan hotel. But never
mind that AS | said if we are going to
| stand by the people in this matter we must
| pass the Currer substitute which the rail
! roads were fighting. If we want to stand by
| the railroads, let US pass H. F. 9O2, the Searle
| substitute
SearIe Replies.
Mr.. Searle was instantly upon his feet, and
| with some yigor he replied to the gentleman
| from Otter Tail in these words:
Il desire to thank the gentleman from OF
| ter Tail for the very high com pliment he has
| paid me. have already given my word in
| this house as to this matter, and am sur
| prised that the gentleman, being on the rail
| road committee and knowing all the work we
| did there and how this bill came before it
| should take any such position | say that
| this house has not had one word of oppo-
| sition from the railroad companies against
| House File 9O1. 1t has had from the railroad
| employees. probably instigated by the railroad
| companies, petitions against House File g.
| There were good reasons for the opposition
| of the railroad companies against House
| File 6S, and every gentleman on the floor of
this house will admit it, for this reason:
| House File 6S, in the very first instance. for
babe the railway from having one word to
say in the fixing of their rates. 1t made the
e e0d asTe t6 primarily to fix them
no voice whatever in fixing their
rates. l am not urging this as an objection
! to House File IS, but / think every member
| would concede where millions were invested
|
| pose law which would confscate their
| property, to permit somebody else to fix their
| rates. So far as House File 901 is concerned
| not one word of opposition has been heard
| from the railway companies; neither has
| House File 9O2 received any support from
| them; and there is no reason for the gentle
man from Otter Tail, or any other person, to
| suppose one bill more acceptable to the rail
| roads than another, except that the question
| OF distance tariff would so upset rates that it
would be very annoying to the railroads, as
well as outside towns. l do not know how
| they view this, and do not care. do how
| ever, deny the statement that opposition has
| been manifested here by the railway com.
| panies to House File 901 more than House
| File 902; and l assume they would be glad to
see both bills defeated.
| Several amendments were offered to House
| File 902, the Searle substitute
| Mr.. Greer. of Wabasha, pointed out the
| absur dity of amending House File 902 before
| deciding which of the two bills was going to
| be finally disposed of by the committee
| Speaker Champlin su pported this point.
| A Surprise.
1t was decided to take a vote upon House
| File 902. The motion that it be recommend
| ed to pass was defeated by an overwhelming
voter yeas to 81 nays. This strength dis
| played by the CuIrier forces had somewhat
| disconcerting effect upon the supporters of
| the Searle bill. However, there was no let
| up in the debate.
Mr.. Currler again moved that House File
901 be recommended to pass.
| a big batch of amendments were sent I'D
| and disposed of. The amendments were of q
| minor character.
Mr.. Reyes participated in the debate Laws
| of the character before them were TO accom-
| plish something for the benefit of the people,
| What they were to do was to enact laws that
| would regulate and control common can
| riers, and at the same time wisely provide ri
| those laws that the people to be benefited
| should have the full benefit OF that regula-
ton without, at the same time, being injured
| by the provisions Of the law. What did the
| present bill proposef 1t provided fixed
ana iron rule for fixing all rates. A man