St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-02-11
CHARTER BUILDING.
Ex-City Attorney RusselTs Opin-
iong--iIaWS for the Poor.

EX-City attorney RUSSetlS Opina
iong--iIaws for the Poor.
The meeting of the FOrtnightly club
last night WAS given over to discussions
of live questions in this hour of sessions
of the legislature and charter drafting.
George S. Holt, secretary of the AsSo-
ciated Charities, read paper Oil Laws
Needed FOR the Poor and Unfortunate"
and r. d. Russell, ex-city attorney, read
one on proposed Legislation Affecting
Our City" Secretary Holt said that the
need of new laws is not SO great as the
need of Incorporating Ill the laws we
have more of the humane spirit. and
providing for its speedy, thor
ough and helpful enforcement"
He classified his recommended
tions unGer two heads: laws
regulating the poor and unfortunate;
laws to prevent the children of the
poor and unfortunate from becoming
paupers. Under the first he would
place the laws for the following pur-
poses: To regulate tenement and lOdg-
ing houses; to punish for neglect of
wife and minor children; to make deser-
ton of wife or child felony; to abolish
public outdoor relief; to require treas
urerS of savings banks to report to city
poor department on request; to
disfranchise pauperS; to define
''pauper." For children, he would
have these: A truancy law;
law to regulate employment of chill
dren; law to regulate neWSbOyS and
bootblackS; nOn-partisan and non-Sec-
tartan compulsory education law rea-
sonably enforced: a national divorce
law. Mr.. Holt said pauperism is in
creasing faster than the population. He
would have the city and county poor de-
partment abolished, and charity dis
pensed through private sources. This
point was strongly Endorsed by X. ID.
Russell and Judge j. o. Pierce.
Il. d. RusselPs paper was almost en-
tirelv comparison between the two
city charter bills now before the legis-
lature-1he Merwin and the Winston
bills. He made the comparison favor
the Winston bill. But he found Oh
iections even in that. He did not like
the uSurpation by the mayor of the
powers of the court in reversing de-
cisionS of judges of the municipal court
and suspendlng fines and penalties. He
diSliked the provision allowing
the council to fix salaries of
aldermen and city officials. the
patrol limits are not sufficiently
provided for in the Winston bill. The
provision COlDpelllIO INC dNdIu VI COil-
tracts 10 the lowest bidder he did not
indorse, as the lowest bidder sometimes
turns out to be the highest bidder. He
objected 10 the provisions for the cleo
ton by the people of president of the
| council. He would. instead, have the
mayor made president of the council,
where he would become better &C
quainted with all the business trans
acted. He would like to see the
mayors office made executive through
the veto power and declined to see the
mayors Office disliked to the exercise of
powers beneath its dignity, as it fire.
| ouently does. He would not favor CIV
ing the boards, as library, park and
| school, the absolute power they now
| have. He would have them made ad
ministrative under the direction of the
| city council. Mr.. Russell strongly en-
dorsed the provision III the Winston
! bill for a board of control for making
tax levies and ordering public improve
| mentS.
Mr.. Russell explained his choice be-
tween the MerWin and Winston bills in
this way: The Merwin bill contem-
plates city government modelled after
| the federal government; the Winston bill
a city government moIeled after bust
ness corporation. The nearer city gov
eminent can approach business cor
poration, and the further it CAN get away
from political system the better.