St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-10-09
The Journal Says Nowhere,
Z and Its Columns Disprove
the Assertion.
Facts About Award and EX-
ecution Of a Million-DOl-
lar Contract.
Position of the Democratic
Candidate Endorsed by Re-
publican Papers.
He Stood for Annually Saw
ing Thousands Of Dollars
to the City.

A couple of days ago the Minneapolis
journal, paper that boasts OF its indie
pendence through twenty months, and
then for four months lends itself to every
sort of political Misrepresentation and
mendacity, published the bold assertion
that Aid. J. c. Haynes had never "led'
in any movement in the city council,
had never done anything, in fact, except
vote. Extracts from its own columns
proves the untruth of its assertions, and
also prove that j. c. Haynes has stood
for economical municipal government.
Along back in July of the present
year the matter OF renewing the con-
tracts for lighting the city. The Jour
nal, in handling the matter editOrially
and in its news columns, brought out the
fact that combine of the electric light
ing companies rules the price of electric
lighting; also that the MINNEAPOLIS Gas
company claims an exclusive franchise
for gas TO light the city. And this. it
may be remarked in passing, is only one
of the exclusive franchises granted by
Republican administrations, which place
the city at the mercy Of corporations.
Only two bids were submitted on city
Lighting; one by the Minneapolis Gas
company for gas lamps, and one by the
electric lighting combine through the
Brush Electric company. Both bids
were OH the basis of five-year contracts.
The bids were generally considered too
high by the aldermen, with few eXcep-
tions. On July 2S, the day before the
council committee ON gas was to meet
and consider
These ExOrbitant Bids,
the journal said:
sit is the general opinion, despite the
lucid explanation of the electric COM
panies. that there is combination
behind their apparent lack of interest,
and this feeling is as general in the
c0uncil as it is with the outside public"
In the same article this statement ap-
peared at the end Of an explanation of
tile offer of the Western Electric COM
in Minneapolis, furnish light at the
same rate or less than The Brush COM
panv's bid, and.at the end of five years,
sell the plant to the city for 81:
. he aldermen make no secret of the
fact that this is very cheap way for
the city to obtain its own lighting
plant"
Well, the gas committee met and the
majority of The committee, Parry, Dur
nam and Farnsworth, gave practically
no consideration TO the offer of the
Western Electric company. These
aldermen presented a report recon-
mending the acceptance of the bids.
The journal said the next day:
The council last night gave the
Brush Electric company and the gas
company contracts for five years for
lightning the streets of the city. Of the
lou re
worth, the Brush company Will get
100000 a year ant the gas company
about 100000 for the full time. The
vote in the council was 81 to 5. Six
hundred or more electric arc lights will
be taken at $3.50 each per year and 1000
gas lamps at s26.29 each per year. This
Is all night and every night"
Aid. 3. C. Haynes
presented a minority report, as follows:
GA minority of your committee would
respectfully report and recommend that
the existing contracts be extended for
one year from their expiration; SAID gas
company to furnish its lights upon the
all night and every night schedule at
the price named in its proposal for such
schedule: and said electric company to
furnish its lights upon the same sched-
ule and according to the terms specified
in the third proposition of its said pro-
posal; and that this body take imme
diate steps to ascertain the cost and
practicability of the city'S establishing
and operating lighting plant of its
own"
This is also from the Journal:
"Mr. Haynes went further and gave
company's proposition filed with the
clerk. 1t was that the company would
furnish the city 1000 acknowledgement
arc lights for S1S5 per lamp, or S35, 200
more than the cost would be under the
Brush bid, and at the end of five years
the company would turn over the plant
to the city for 81. He realized the dan
gers of the municipality engaging in
priyate business. but he thought the at
titude of the electric lighting concern
called for such action"
The majority report was adopted, and
the city was bound to pay out 100000
and have nothing left to show for it. In
the edition containing the report of the
councils action the Journal editOrially
Endorsed Aid. Haynes
position, thus:
''The lighting of Minneapolis at the
rates agreed to by the council last night.
and including the oil lamps, for the next
five years will cost 81, 19l, 300. The Jour-
nal does not believe it is necessary to
pay any such sum as that. The lighting
companies have the advantage of the
city Just now, and the city must pay
whatever they have mind to charge,
but there is no necessity of tieing up
the city to them for five years longer.
Make a shorter contract and in the
meantime get out from under"
Mayor Winston vetoed the resolution
awarding these contracts and called a
special meeting to act on the question.
That meeting was held Aug. 8, when
the street lighting was called up.
Aid. Haynes Presented
the following resolution:
Resolved by the city council of the
city OF Minneapolis, That the proposals
OF the Minneapolis Gas Light company
and the Minnesota Brush Electric com
paly for lighting said city, each respec-
lively bearing date july s, 1892, be, and
the same are hereby rejacte3, and that
said city offer to renew the contracts
now existing between said companies
and said clly for the period of one year
from the respective dates OF the eXpir-
alton CT said contracts upon the follow
ing terms. to wit: Said gas company to
furnish its tights upon the all night and
every night schedule at the price named
IN its proposal Tor such schedule; and
said electric company to furnish it's
lights upon the same schedule and ac-
cording TO the terms named in the third
proposition of its said proposal. and if
this offer prove not acceptable to said
companies that the said contracts be re-
newed for such period of one year upon
t. cir present terms and conditions and
that this body take immediate steps to
ascertain the cost and practicability of
tia city's establishing and operating a
lighting plant of its own"
Of course, that resolution was defeat
ed. Immediately afterward another
resolution was presented and passed
directing the execution OF a tive-year
contract with the Minneapolis Gas con-
pauy.
These quotations from the Journal
and from the official publication of the
proceedings of the city council
Speak for Themselves.
They utterly dlsprove the assertion
of the Journal. They do prove that Mr..