St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-03-10
GOOD ROADS. Il
A Hot Discussion and No Final
Results i'm the Senate.

A Hot Discussion and No Final
Results in the Senate.
Two good roads bills were before the
senate yesterday. They are Senator
Motifs measures, and their author made
gallant fight for their passage. There
was a wide divergence of opinion, how
ever, upon the merits of the measures.
The advocates of the bills took the po-
sition that all the present evils would
be remedied by the change proposed in
the law, and the entire afternoon was
consum ed in discussing the subject.
Senator Mayo made an eloquent APP
peal to his cadjutors to support the
measure. He had practical eXperInce,
and this counted for much. Senator
Stevens made an imprisoned speech.
He called upon the powers that be and
the powers prospective to come to the
rescue of the state and pass the meas
ure. Senator Kelley was opposed. he
introduced an amendment to the first
bill considered, striking out section 3.
This is the provision esteemed the most
Vital of all by the advocates Of the meas
ure. 1t does away with the present
system of Overseers of roads, and makes
new provisions with view to removing
the same as far as possible from pol
tics.
Senator Mott made an earnest speech
in favor of his measure. CanestOrp
was opposed, and he moved to indefi-
nitely postpone. Senator Stevens made
an eloquent effort. He pointed to the
fact that in many respects the United
States are ahead of Europe, but he
insisted that in the maintenance and
construction of roads Europe ranks
first. Senator j. W. Peterson was also
an earnest advocate. Senator Kelly's
motion to strike out section 8, re-
| lating to road overSeerS, was declared
passed by the chair, but Senator Mott
would not accept the ruling. He ap-
| pealed, and he was sustained by the
| senate. Senator Hammer made stir
ring speech against the bill, but Senator
| Mayo described personal experiences in
| picturesque way in support of the bill.
| Senator McHaIe had definite knowl-
edge, while lie had no definite
| choice. He made an eloquent
| argument for the bill. He said
| that the system of working out ones
| taxes on the roads is a fallacy. 1t is, on
! the other hand. as rule, gathering of
ueighbors for the exchange of stories.
| they sit in the shade,and smoke the con-
! yivial pipe. Senator La Due made an
eloquent appeal tor the preservation of
the Dill lnLact. he referred III glowing
| terms to the course that had been fol-
| lowed by the so-called good roads con-
| vention, held in the capitol early in the
session. He argued that to do away
| With section 3. the whole bill in effect
| would be killed.
! Senator Lommen made strong
speech against the bill, and he scored
! Senator McHale with little mercy, but
senator Gesse retaiated with spirit.
! lie raised the point of ORDER which was
! Sustained, that thedebaterswere arguing
| upon another bill.
i Senator Day came to the rescue of the
measure. In his rare eloquence he
advocated the passage Of the measure,
following somewhat in the footsteps of
Senator Stevens. Senator March sup
ported the bill in warm speech, but
Senator Croft fought it to the bitter end.
senator Croft offered an amendment so
| that the act will be submitted to the
people. but this was lost, and Senator
| Canestorp's motion 10 Indefinitely post
| pone was lost, while the author sue
| ceeded. Senator HOmpe also made
| spirited speech. He thought that the
/ act would discriminate against certain
classes. The farmers We're most in
| terested in good roads. Finally the
committee arose and the bill was IecOm-
| mended to pass.