St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-04-08
MINNEAPOLIS WINS.
On Reconsideration the House
Passes the Patrol Linn
its Bill.
Gallant Members Do Not
Tackle Kindly to Wom-
an Suffrage.
A Rather Personal Debate on
the Railroad Land Grant
Bill.
Odds and Ends Of a Very
Busy Session Brought
Together.

Yesterday was strictly a working day
in the house. The days session opened
at 9 a. m. with Il very slim attendance.
Members dropped IN one by Que until
after IL o'clock there was an average
number present. A recess was taken
at 1880 until 2 o'clock, and the grind"
continued up to 6 o'clock. A ecesS for
supper followed, and at 40 O'clock the
legislative mill was again under Way
The adjournment for the day was taken
at 10 O'Clock. Five hours were spent
on the third reading of bills, during
which the business of the house was of
the most routine character. 1t was one
long succession of reading the roll call.
Reading Clerk Deakin could not posi-
bly, cope with the great strain upon his
voice, and Second Assistant Clerk
Moody was called in to relieve. Thirty
five bills were acted upon, a major por-
ton Of them being of a local character.
The mOnotony of the proceedings was
broken by a vote taken upon Mr.. Smiths
bill, prescribing the patrol limits of the
city OF Minneapolis.
Mr.. Knudson, of Blue Earth, thought it
was a local blll-entered a protest against it.
Mr.. Long, of Hennepin, promptly sat upon
the gentleman from Blue Earth, informing
the house that the Hennepin delegation had
agreed upon this bill.
MIR. Cole (E.)-Not erery member of the
~Ilennepln delegation. [ am opposed to it.
Mr.. Stockwell asked to be excused from
voting upon the bill. His reason was: That
the fixing of the patrol limits was for the
city council Of Minneapolis and not for the
legislature.
The vote stood: Yeas. 81; nays. 16, so the
bill failed to pass. Mr.. Long gave no
tice that he would move to reconsider the
bill, a large number OF the Hennepin mem
bers being absent.
Mr.. Long had the bill reconsidered some
hours later, when there was q lively discus
sion.
Mr.. Reeve, of Hennepin, wanted to amend
the bill. striking out a section which author
lied the city council of Minneapolis TO eX-
tend or limit the patrol limits.
Mr. Smith was inclined to accept the
amendment, but Mr.. Penney opposed.
Mr.. Diment hoped thai the Hennepin dele
cation would settle their own differences;
that they would not come to the house to set
sic these vexed points. He moved that the
bill be referred back to the Hennepin delega-
ton.
Mr.. Smith protested against any such ref
erence;. The delegation had been discussing
the bill for four months. He wanted the
matter to be definitely passed upon.
Mr. StockWell once more reitered his OBJ
lection to the legislature interfering in the
liking OF the patrol limits. Let the council
OF minneapolis attend to such matters. 1t
was below the dignity of the legislature to
occupy its time i'll discussing this question.
Mr.. Darellus-The lines drawn by the bill
does not take i'll any territory except that
upon which the delegation was agreed.
MI. I. Long vigorously supported the pas
sage OF the bill.
Mr.. Reeve-Let me ask you a question. Has
this bill been before the delegation?
Mr.. Long-It has.
Mr.. Reeve-When?
Mr.. LOng-A week ago.
Mr.. Reeves there any evidence of that
on the bill?
Mr.. Gallagher said he could not answer
that. The bill had been before the committee
on local bills as well.as a subcommittee of
the delegation.
Mr.. iieeve-Has that section have stricken
out been before the delegation?
Mr.. Gallagher do not know.
Mr.. Reeve have no desire to act con
trary to the wishes of the maiority-of the
majo-ity of the delegates in regard to this
bill, This section, however, had not been
considered by the Hennepim delegation. He
did not think this was lair to the delegation
or to the people of Minneapolis.
Mr.. Smith-Thisb bill, as it now exists, has
been in the hand of every member of the
delegation who is interested in it. Mr.. Reeve
has no interest in the bill. His district is not
included within the patrol limits.
Mr.. Reeve argued that it was a radical
Minneapolis to change the patrol limits as
they desired. This was a matter which in
Jerested every member of the delegation.
The amendment proposed by Mr.. Reeve
was lost. ana the bill passed by the following
vote: