Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1897-04-29
STATE AGRICULTURAL BOARD


JOn ~ 1NpW Gduti1 A1iuCtfiu huiiWHy w.
was taken up in the House yesterday
afternoon. and after lively debate,
which was participated In by several
Of the members, 1t was laid over until
10 o'cluck this morning.
The bill, which provides that the
company may extend iH lines down the
State as far as Smyrna and north,
through Wilmington, as far as the
Pennsylvania State line. was called up
by Representative Hazell. Its opponents
to the bill manifested great deal of
uneasiness, and as soon as the clerk
commenced to read the bill, Mr.. Short
OF Sussex county arose to question Of
privilege, anu stated that he was under
The impression that the bill had been
killed about two weeks ago, when 1t
was called from the calendar by Mr..
Thompson, but by decisive vote of
the House was not taken therefrom at
that time. Mr.. Short commended that
by voting not to take IL up, at that
time, the House had killed the bill.
He said he had good authority for
such belief, and was under the i'm.
preston that some of his colleagues
were OF the same opinion.
Mr.. Dempsey of New Castle county
thought such IN idea preposterous, and
did not believe that anybody enter
tanned amy notion that the bill was
dead. "It is just as much alive,o he
said, "as any bill ever introduced in
this General Assembly
Mr.. Adams of Kent county made a
speech in support OF Mr.. Shorts son.
tention. He said that he had under.
stood that such was the accepted
opinion. He said he had read it In
some of the newspapers, and that they
supported this opinion.
In reply to Mr.. Adams, Mr.. Demp
soy said the newspapers referred to
published the report us coming from
the people who were opposed to the
bill, and he challenged Mr.. Adams to
point out single paper which had
supported the contention. Continuing,
Mr.. Dempsey called the attention OF
the members to the fact that not a line
of the bill had been read on the day it
was called up by Mr.. Thompson, and
therefore it would have been impos-
sible to kill it then. 1t was not even
under consideration. The matter be-
fore the House, and which was voted
on, was as to whether the bill should
be taken from the calendar, and by a
decisive vote, it had been decided not
10 take 1t from the calendar at that
time.
Mr.. HAZEL did not think the bill was
dead. He said he bad taken the trouble
10 inquire into the rules uf the House
of Representatives at Washington, and
had learned that the custom there was
that when a bill is called up from the
calendar and by vote it, ia decided
not 10 take 1t up at that time, it goes
to the foot of the calendar and the
calendar is usually go long that the
end is not reached during the session,
aud for that reason 10 practically
killed, at least until some succeeding
session.
Mr.. Mccullough asked IL there was
not precedent in the House journal
Of 1858. He also asked that it be read.
Mr.. johnson said that the journal Of
1858 was no precedent for this Legis-
lature, and as Mr.. Mccullough did not
insist on bic request, the journal was
not read.
Continuing, Mr.. johnson ssid the
House had violated ono OF its own
rules when the bill was called up. The
rule violated was the one prohibiting
bills being called up In the absence OF
its friends. The ruie also gives the
person introducing a bill the right to
call 1t up.
Mr.. Short said that be understood
that on the day the bill was called up
by Mr.. Thompson that he was voting
to kill it.
Mr.. Dempsey called for the question,
but was interrupted by Speaker Rig
gin, who announced that he would
give ruling on the question as to
whether or not tho bill was dead. He
read an opinion, in which he stated
that as the vote had been on the ques.
tion whether or not TO take the bill
from the calendar, the vote had been
not 10 take Ii up, and for that reason
the bill was not dead.
After delivering his opinion, the
Speaker asked IL there were any of the
members who desired to make any re.
marks, whereupon MIR. Dempsey made
a strong plea for the passage of the
bill. He argued in conclusive man
ner that the people demand it's passage,
and urged his colleagues to vote for it.
Mr.. adams opposed the bill, on the
ground that the Wilmington City Rail-
way Go. had perpetual charter that
gave ii the exclusive right to operate
street railway service in Wilmington,
and he thought the granting of adj
ditional privileges TO the new road
would he detrimental to the interests
OF the city company. lie read a letter
which said that there was an agree.
ment between the two companies
whereby the Wilmington a. New Castle
Co. might operate over the lines OF tbs
Wilmington City 20. in Wilmington,
and therefore he was opposed to allow.
ing the new company to build line
through Wilmington.
Mr.. Wilson stated that he was favor.
able to the main features OF tho bill,
but differed from some of the members
concerning some Of the details. He
thought, however, that the friends anG
opponents of the bill could get together
on a compromises. He stated that soms
of the opponents to the bill, who were
honest in their convictions. had beer
misrepresented and be desired to eel
himself right before the public. Ht
wished it UNDERSTOOD that be wai
prompted only by an honest motive t.
act justly in tha matter. He thought
that the Legislature owed the Whining
ton City Railway Go. certain amount
OF protection, and was not in favor o.
competition whore he deemed it I'm
necessary,
Mr.. johnson said no could count OF
tho fingers of his two hands the per
sons who were responsible for th,
principal influence against thu new
road. The influence OF ten or dozer
people, he said, is greater with som,
of the members of the General aae,,,