St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1896-02-18
HOT DEBATE AT MARKET HALL.
THE ST. PAUL MAN CHAMPIONS
THE HOWARD ENACTMENT FOR
LARGE CITIES.
IS OPPOSED TO THE BoaRp RIFE,
me minneapolis Man Takes the
Home Rule Charter to Be the
Best.

ket hall last night, where they listened
| to an instructive and entertaining de-
bate upon the Howard charter They
| heard its praises sounded by Judge
| James Shoemaker, of this city, while
| Frank N. Stacey, of Minneapolis. ar
| ralgned the measure in vigorous Ian
| guage, in which ridicule and sarcasm
We're employed with telling effect
Conspicuous in the audience and on
| the platform were many well-known
citizens and several members of the
common council. Aldermen Montgom-
| cry and Lindahl, c. W. Horr, H. S.
Fairchild and George Woolsey occu-
pied chairs on the platform. MrWool-
| Sey performed the duties Of chairman.
After calling the meeting to order,
Chairman Woolsey announced the pro-
| gramme of the debate, which was as
| folloWs: Judge Schoonmaker was to
| open with an argument in support of
the affirmative proposition, that the
| best interests of the city demanded
| the adoption Of the Howard charter
| His argument was limited to thirty-five
minutes. MIR. Stacey was to follow for
| the negative in speech of forty-five
minutes duration, after which twenty
| minutes would be allowed to Judge
| Schoonmaker for a reply, and ten min
| utes to Mr.. Stacey for the latters re-
| ply. This programme was carried out
to the letter, the debate beginning at
| o:z5 p. m. and closing at 1920 p. NJ,
only five minutes being lost in inter
missions.
The debate was listened to with the
closest attention. 1t was apparent
| that the audience contained some
| friends of the Howard charter, but
| equally evident, judging from the fire.
| quent applause, laughter and demon
STATIONS of approval that greeted Mr.
! Staceys remarks, that the, majority of
| the citizens present did not feel bad
! over the abuse of the Howard charter.
After announcing the order of the dis
| cussion, Chairman Woolsey introduced
Judge Schoonmaker. The latter be-
| gan, without the slightest hesitation,
| to explain in a general way the nature
of the Howard charter, pointing out as
briefly and concisely as possible the
distinctions between that form OF mu-
| n1cipal government and the present
4 Bell charter. This task necessarily oc-
cupied a considerable portion of the
| speakers allotted thirty-five minutes,
| and therefore shortened his argument
! somewhat.
After outlining the Howard charter
and describing it's general provisions
relative to the powers bestowed upon
the council and it's abolition of boards,
Judge Schoonmaker proceeded to point
| out what he conceived to be the curse
Of board rule under the Bell charter
He denounced the boards in scathing
terms, and in substantiation of his
| charges of mlSgovernment laid at their
| door, the speaker cited facts and fig
ures covering a period Of ten years or
more, which tended to show the widest
extravaganza upon the part of the
various boards, more especially the
school board.
Judge Schoonmaker maintained on
| r6 oh orfa hot
| gave the mayor more power in some
respects than the Bell charter. His
| veto power was rendered more effec-
| tive. But the great blessing of the
| Howard charter was that 1t relieved
the people from the tyranny and des-
potism of board rule.
Mr.. Shoemaker characterized the
Bell charter as a collection of special
las so inconsistent that no attorney
could give any definite opinion upon
any matter regulated by these laws.
But no more special laws can now be
passed, and we must either endure
those we have or else secure the
passage of complete general law that
| Will correct the abuses and incOnSiS-
tencies Of the special laws. The form
of our present city government, said the
speaker, was generally denominated
| board rule. Every important depart
ment save the police, was under the
control of a board. In the face of the
| laws of this state, the code of st. Paul.
we have been informed that before 1891
| the city of st. Paul was under a coun-
Gil government. Printers ink was never
used to record a more audacious lie
| than this.
Judge Shoemaker then proceeded
| to define in general way the changes
that are proposed by the Howard char
| ter. 1t meant, first, the adjustment of
| ri r11Ia In of
executive power in the council 1t
abolished the board Of public works
and the fire board. 1t vested the most
extensive veto power in the mayor Of
any municipal law.
The speaker dwelt upon another
! change. In reply to the statement that
under the Howard charter the council
was under no restriction as to the
amount of it's expenditures, the speak
er said that a tax levy board limited
! the amount to be appropriated for any
and all purposes.
Judge Shoemaker then called the
| attention of his hearers to certain
| government of ST. Paul since 1885 On
Jan. 1, 1885, the city's debt was s2,977,-
| 0o0; the population III, 900. Now the
population is 145,000 and in 1892 our
debt was $40, $50, 900, an increase of over
$100, 900, 900 each year, from 1885 to 1892
The school board was scored for its eX-
travagance in 1892, for spending over
half million dollars for the mainte-
nance of the schools, when the enroll
| ment showed an attendance Of only
! 0000 pupils. The speaker cited the ac-
| ton Of the reform legislative delegation
| of 1891, which formulated and enacted
the Bell charter, and dilated upon the
| reductions and limitations placed upon
the extravagant expenditures of the va
rious boards.
In conclusion, Judge Schoonmaker
criticised in the most emphatic Ian
| guage what he regarded as the arbi-
| trary actions of the park board under
the powers granted to that body by the
Bell charter.
MR.. STACEY'S ARGUMENT.
Mr. Stacey's argument follows:
The principle of self-government is the
foundation of American institutions. When
it was promulgated in the Declaration of In
| dependence that governments are instituted
| among men, deriving their just powers from
the consent of the governed the doctrine Of
| home rule was planted on American soil for
! all time. To secure that principle our fore
fathers braved the perils of revolution. In
law and in blood they wrote the gospel Of
| hcme rule for America. They flung away
the colonial charters imposed upon them by
paternalistic parliament, held their own
| charter convention, and framed their own
charter the home rule plan that govern
ment derives its just powers from the con-
sent of the governed. The first home-rule
| charter commission convened on the Amer
lean continent was the constitutional con-
vention of 1857; the first home-rue charter in
| the American republic, the constitution of
| the United States
| Since that first charter drafted for the
nation. the people of forty-five states have
framed their charters. or state constitutions,