St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-02-08
MINNEAPOLIS.
CURRENT CoMMENT.

City Attorney Russell, whose opinion
upon legal matters affecting the city's
Interests are not always easily obtained,
has rushed into print with twO-column
review of the proposed new city charter
introduced by Representative Trip in
the legislature. AS might be imagined.
a man who held Oh to one office while he
ran for another does not like the meas
ure which he thinks will practically leg
islate him out of office, as under
the proposed charter the city attorney
will be apDoIdted by the mayor who is
Democrat and not by the council,
which happens TO be Republican.
thanks to disgraceful gerrymander
bv the previous legislature. This may
account for the fact that his review OF
the new charter is not made III a calm,
diSpasSionate way, but carplng, hyper
critical manner in which he takes ad-
vantage of even typographical errors to
show up what he claims were glarlng
inconsistencies.
Il
The discussion which has been in
yited of the various provisions of the
charter will naturally do away with the
seeming Inconsistencies. Many OF the
proposed changes may be omitted, 9th
ers modified, as the result of candid
consideration, but, at any rate, the
Democrats should have the credit OF
submitting the matter for discussion,
and have not followed the exam
ole of their Republican prede-
CeSsors in railroading legislation
which thwarted the will of the people
and set aside the entire results almost
of an election. Mr. Russell has, doubt
less, found a good many errors IN the
rough draft of the new charter not as
many as Ed A. Stevens found i'll the
present charter, of which Mr.. Russell
speaks SO reverently; but the question
at issue is whether the admlnlStra-
tive power shall be taken from
the council and placed in the hands
of the mayor, who will then be the
chief executive of the city in fact
as we'll as in name, and who can then
be fairly held responsible to the peo-
ple fol- his administration. This chief
point of the question at issue is we'll
presented by communication from Mr..
Trip in another column, to which the
attention of all who are interested IN
this important matter is called.
Representative Matt Gallagher said last
evening. concerning the interview with
c. NJ. Foote, published in yesterdays
Tribune:
IF c. NJ. Foote made the statement
credited to him in yesterdays Tribune,
to the effect that the trouble is that we
have number of young m 9mbers with
out previous legislative training who
want to crow loud in order to attract at
tention, | am not surprised that the
Tribune should abuse myself and other
members of the delegation, as the
TrlbuneS motive in defending
Mr.. Lowry's interests is well
known. | am, however, surprised
that MI. Foote should make such an I'M
fair remark. There is to be a meeting
OF the Hennepin and Ramsey delega-
tions in the house Of representatives, at
St.Paul,on Monday night, to consider the
street railway legislation, to which MI.
Foote and his colleague, the editor Of
the Tribune, are cordially invited. If
they have any mud to throw there is the
place to dump it. The young members
without any previous legislative train
ing will be there to meet them and de-
fend the position they have taken"
''The poor are always with u.s." so is
the garbage question. 1t has already
fingered too long, longer than seems
necessary 1t began to agltate what
passes for mind in the skull of the mu-
nicipal solon some two years or more
ago. 1t is now no further on the road to
solution than before. The late health
commissioner showed commendable
public spirit by the manner i'll which he
took up this vital question and gave toit
thought and study. His efforts toward
its solution seemed, to the public, TO
have been fraught with success.
Through him several propositions, any
one of which was practicable and eff
cient, were proposed to the city. Some
were Endorsed and ordered carried out;
none were ever completed. The last
one offered by him was for the trans
portation of all garbage and night soil
to Brooklyn township, and their utiliza-
ton there as fertiliZing mate
rial. That proposition was hailed
as a solution of the yexatious
question. On the face of it it looked
like a good scheme. 1t was ordered
carried out. Then new health board
came into existence, and the Brooklyn
proposition was dropped. 1t has never
come up again. Why? Nobody knows.
Anyhow. new propositions are being
considered. If none of the propositions
Endorsed by the public and blythe pub
lies representatives and ordered con-
summated, shouldn't some reason be
offered for their abandonment?