St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-03-08
SPIRIT OF FAIRNESS,

he wanted to speak in favor of the
bill. While the offer of the site was
made in good faith, yet he believed the
men to have been misled by belief
that there Is a sentiment in favor of
removal. He knew that they had been
misinformed and that there is no SEN
timent in favor of removal in the
legislature. He alluded to the agita-
ton In favor OF the removal by the
Minneapolis press, and while he be-
lieved his opposition to that senti-
ment would be criticised, yet he felt it
his right to be consistent and say that
he had advised against making the
proposition for removal. He would
vote against the removal and would
oppose postponement, but would,
through courtesy to his delegation,
vote for postponement for a week, but
hoped the proposition for removal
would be defeated.
Senator McHale said he opposed any
measure looking to capital removal.
He saw no reason why the state
should be placed in the position of
being a pauper or begging for site
for a seat of government. He spoke
of the early settlement of the state
and the geography Of the country hay-
ing fixed the capital at ST. Paul. While
not wearing bristeS, yet he thought
the proposition to gather two large i'm
situations into one city has bristles.
He doubted the power of the city Of
Minneapolis to donate a public park to-
the state. The proposition was one
from few ambitious persons. He
favored relieving the Hennepin deleI
cation OF any responsibility by pass
ing the bill at once.
Senator Greer favored passing the
bill at once, and alluded to the oft-re-
peated proposition to place the capitol
on wheels. or move it about from
place to place. He spoke of the mat
ter having been ably discussed and
settled two years ago. He said that
the question of the cost of the capitol
has been settled. The time for offer
ing site by Minneapolis was two
years ago, when the commission was
looking for a-site and was not limited
as to cost. 1t would be a business
proposition to pass the bill. =
The proposition to postpone action
for a week was lost by vote of II
to 81
object of the bill being to correct
minor details in the original act as
to designs and plans, also to change
the powers as to the commission rel
alive to construction, so as to secure
the services of, competent architect
The board had been unable to induce
the leading architects of the country
to submit plans, because they belong
to an association that prevents it's
members from entering into a COM
petition, and it is desirable to pay an
architect more than is provided in
the original act
Senator Ringdal offered an amend
ment to require a bond from the ar
chitect of $1,000000 which was voted
down.
Senator Reishus wanted to amend
by restricting the commission to the
architect to 211a per cent, on the theory
that values are shrinking as the re-
suit of the gold standard policy of
Cleveland and John Sherman. Sem
ator Morgan opposed the amendment,
as did also Senator Wyman. The
amendment was lost
The recommendation to pass the
house bill carried and the senate
bill was reported for progress.
When the committee arose the house
bill was given a second reading, and
on motion of Senator Yale the rules
were suspended and the bill placed
upon it's final passage, and carried by
vote of Al to H. Those voting for
the bill were Senator's: