The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1896-01-30
ASYLUM LOCATION.
HOT CONTROVERSY BETWEEN HAST
MGS AND ANOKA.
Fhe State Commission Has Filed It's
Answer In the Injunction Pro-
ceedings-Anol<a Also Makes An
swer In Which Sensational
Charges are Made.

spring by Gov. Clough to locate the
fourth hospital for the insane are hav-
ing no end of trouble They first To-
Gated the hospital at Hastings, but the
Anoka people pushed their claims so
strongly that the action was reconsid-
cred, and Anoka was selected Then
the Hastings people rose in their
wrath and vowed by all the gods that
the commission had no right or prece-
dent in taking it away from that city
and giving it to Anoka, and forthwith
secured a ,temporary injunction from
Judge Brill, Of the Ramsey county
court, restraining the commission from
taking any action to locate the hospi-
tai in a place other than on the site
offered by Hastings. The injunction
also restrained the city Of Anoka from
confederating to secure a change in
the location of the hospital. a5
The complaint covers the acts Of the
commission in detail up to the close Of
it's second meeting last week in Fer
gus Falls, when it reconsidered it's
former action voting to locate the hos
pital at Hastings, which, the COM
plant alleges, the commission had no
right to do.
The complaint alleges that the COM
mission accepted the Hastings SITE
Also asserts that the city Of Hastings,
by purchasing a portion of the land
giving a bond to the commission in
the sum Of $4,000 to assure that body
that it would carry out it's contract,
which said bond was accepted, had
acted upon the acceptance. Further,
that Commissioner Hopper, in changing
his vote to Anoka, did not do so be-
cause the site at Hastings was not in
every way fit and according to the
specifications in the advertisement
calling for proposals for sites, but be-
cause he was Influenced by a political
reason, quoting him as saying:
Il voted for Hastings, believing the
site offered by Hastings to he the best
and the most advantageous to the
state. I believe so still. But I repre-
sent the Seventh district, and my con-
stituents want me to vote for Anoka.
I, therefore, changed to Anoka.''
The commission filed it's answer, and
also served notice Of motion to dis
solve the injunction. The motion is
based upon the answer and upon four
afidavits made by Messrs. Merriam,
Eastman, Hopper and Block, and petit
tons signed by large number of the
residents of the Seventh district,
which, it is claimed by the plaintiff,
induced Mr.. Hopper to change his VOTE
The grounds for the motion are that
the court has no jurisdiction over the
commission, because they were emit
tied to use their best judgment in the
matter. and because they are a state
board; and no facts are set up in the
complaint that would warrant an in
junction, because the plaintiff does not
show any injury. Further, that the
are denied by the answer, which
claims that the commission had
right to reconsider the action taken
on Dec. IS, when it was attempted to
locate the hospital in the vicinity of
Hastings, and that the action Of the
commission in afterward locating the
hospital at AnOka and selecting and
purchasing definite site there was
proper. 1t is claimed, although the
commission voted for Hastings in the
first place that they did this only to
determine the general location Of a
hospital, and that they never selected
a definite site near Hastings, and
when the commission reconsidered the
matter it simply changed the general
location from Hastings to Anoka, and
afterwards voted to purchase for the
state a definite and specific site near
Anoka.
Commissioner Hopper, who was the
member who changed his vote. states
in his affidavit that after the resolu-
ton was carried, Smith stated that he
could not understand how a commits
sioner could change his vote, and that
he thought it was illegal Hr. Hopper
states that he replied as follows, in
stead of as stated in the complaint:
cat the meeting in st. Paul 1 voted
for Hastings. 1 am now convinced
that the best interests Of the state
will be served by locating the fourth
hospital north of the Twin Cities, and
in so voting am representing the sen
timent Of my district" He also adds
In his affidavit that he produced for
the commission the petitions which he
received. They are attached to the
affidavit, are very voluminous, and
contain the names of the most promi-
nent citizens Of the Seventh district.
The commission in it's answer, sets
forth the different propositions by
which sites were offered. 1t appears
that four were offered near Anoka,
two near Hastings one near Jordan,
one near Delano and several others.
s.a AnOIa's Answer. .r n.
The answer of the city Of Anoka was
served upon the various parties to the
action and filed in the clerk of the
courts office, at st. Paul, by G.. H.
Wyman, city attorney Of Anoka. s#
After recounting the law under
which the commission was organized,
the bids are narrated, and then the an
swer charges DR.. Smith with trying to
make deal with Chaska, agreeing to
vote for the site near Chaska, provided
the citizens would agree to donate the
sum of $4,000, which they would re-
ceive from the state, toward a hospital
for the acute insane, to be located in
the midway district, between st. Paul
and Minneapolis. Which the citizens
Of Chaska declined to do.
They also charge that Hastings in
cluded 100 acres in the plat submitted
to the commission which were not in
cluded in the written offer, and that
the members of the commission were
misled and deceived by the plat and
did not discover the discrepancy be-
tween the plat and written offer until
after the Goth of December.
DR.. Smiths Reply
DR.. Smith made the following state