The Irish standard., 1891-06-20

TWIN CITY UNION.

Dss@x1VxkJAIASkEJsx
TWIN CITY UNION.
The question Of uniting the two cities
Minneapolis and st. Paul was the
subject Of an interesting and lengthy
discourse by Archbishop Ireland last
Monday evening at banquet given by
the Minnesota Transfer board of trade.
Here Is little of what the archbishop
said in favor of such union: II believe
IN the present opportunity. 1 believe if
the union of the two cities is desirable
thing to have IN the future we may as
we'll try to have it soon. These two
cities were made to be one. Business
men, merchants, thinkers, will tell you
that whatever helps one helps the other;
shat whatever retards one retards the
other. Our interests are one. Let us
20 tomorrow before America and say we
have population of 800. 900; why, our
credit will increase in the money mark
cts Of the world; immigration will come,
and we will grow in the next five years
three times as fast as if we remained
separate. Our quarrelings are doing us
immense harm. Most of you have read
the words spoken few days ago in New
Y ork by Thomas Lowry, who has done
so much for both cities and for their
union. He says that he has thrown his
two railway companies into one in view
of what is sure to come, the union Of the
two cities. [Applause.] There are few,
of course, who for the sake of old times,
would rather keep the two cities separ-
ate. This is sentiment. Well, senti-
ment is very good SO long as it does not
run counter to serious and important in.
terests; but the union of these two cities
is important. And anyway, one sentl-
ment will be stronger than ever when
we stand out prominent among the fore
most Of the country There is no doubt
the wisdom of what Archbishop ireland
SAYS. He recognizes the Importance of
such reunion. There can be no doubt
whatever about the tact that if the two
cities were one, it would be much better
for both. AS it is now their interests are
identical, but the question is, are the
people ready for such an amalgamation?
Like many other things the subject will
become less difficult of solution the better
it is understood. There certainly cannot
come any good to either city by a clash
ing of forces from time TO time. Both
have got their individual interests which
must be protected, and it certainly does
not appear at this writing that the inter-
ests of either would be damaged in any
way by union. It is we'll that the
subject be discussed. Though there are
several unimproved acres between the
two cities now, still these fields would
soon become dotted with houses, and
what is now on open prairie would
soon be thriving city. Our population
would place JUS ahead of several cities
that claim almost first place among the
cities of the Union. Our credit would
be increased, and many unforeseen adj
vantages would accrue to us. We need
not Of course jump into this discussion
without first weighing well what it is and
what it proposes, OF course the ques-
ton of union must be left with the peo-
pie of both cities, and il they are in favor
of it, we unite; if not, then we live as
now. We fully agree with the archbishop
that tour quarrelings are doing us I'M
mense harm.'' Certainly there is moth
ing to be gained by wrangling, and if
the union of both cities will help us, we
could do worse than work for it. 1t will
be some tune, however, before both
cities are one, but the day will come
when there will be no boundary line
where it is now, and when the state
capitol will ornament the midway
district.