The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-04-04
= LEGISLATIVE : pOJNGS. =

possible to get franchise in ST. Paul for
any new line.
Mr.. Dwinnell thought two-thirds vote
was enough and his suggestion in the
shape of an amendment was adopted.
Mr.. Dunn had another amendment
which gave no exclusive franchise or
right to any company for the use of any
public street or ground, nor the whole Of
any street or ground
Mr.. Jacobson iRep.), of Lac qui Parie
In an amendment provided that the tax
alton in any city or village of the rail-
way lines should be of such proportion
of the gross earnings as would be equiva-
lent to the tax imposed upon other prop
erty in the city or village.
These amendments having all been
adopted, Mr.. Hillary moved the bill as
amended be recommended to pass
PLEAD FOR STREET RAILWAY.
Mr.. Dwinnell objected to this and made
a strong talk FOR the indefinite postpone
ment of the bill. He said the citizens Of
Minneapolis objected to any rival street
railway company being allowed to enter
that city. The citizens did not want the
fare lowered. The bill, as amended was
not at all like the bill introduced and
was not the one wanted. The bill affect
ed, both ST. Paul and Minneapolis and the
Twin City Rapid Transit company, as
now doing business, was satisfactory to
the citizens of both cities. The company
mad the best line of any city In the
| country in Minneapolis and was about to
eXpend S500,0O0 in new equipment in ST.
Faul. There was no demand for any such
legislation in either of the cities
Mr.. Staples expressed surprise that a
member should make such a statement.
IL was the first he had heard that the
city of Minneapolis did not desire any
other street railway than the one it had
lie doubted if the patrons of street rail-
ways in Minneapolis would not favor {,
line which would allow a cheaper fare
than cents.
Mr.. Winston was In favor of allowing
as many street railway lines in Mime
apolis as would come in and do business
ne Dill gave the council control of the
lines and he saw no reason why it should
not pass
Mr.. Dwinnell, however, thought the
bill, as amended, had been considered in
haphazard way and should not pass
continuing, he said: Il represent the SEN
tlment of thinking men of MINNEAPOLIS
and they are not IN favor of competing
street railway lines in Minneapolis. The
system, as now operated, gives the pub
lie many advantages. The time is not far
distant when the company will pay big
taxes In both Minneapolis and ST. Paul.
and If they did more cities would have II
IL is better to pay cents than cents
ana nave copperS given in change and
have them in ones pockets"
Mr.. Winston inquired if the door was
not open to the council of Minneapolis TO
aloW other street railway companies to
come in.
Mr.. Dwinnell said this was a ouestion
which had not been passed upon by the
supreme court, and lawyers were divided
on the question.
Mr.. finland Oem.), of Ramsey, called
the attention of the chairman to the fact
that there were lobbyists on the floor OF
the mouse and he glared at former Sena-
tor hiram +. Stevens as he spoke
The bill was recommended to pass with
but one dissenting vote, that of MIR.
Dwinnen. AS amended the bill reads as
follows:
Section l. That the common councils or
other governing bodies of the several
cities and villages in this state are here
by authorized and empowered to grant
by not less than a two-thirds vote there
or or the entire council or other govern
ing bodies by ordinance to that effect to
individuals, companies and corporations
the right to construct, maintain and oper-
ate street railway lines, by other than
steam power for the transportation OF
passengers for a period not exceeding
twenty-five years, upon such of the public
streets and grounds in such cities and vii
lagos and for such consideration and upon
Such terms and conditions as to the use
and occupation of the same for such pur-
pose, as such common council or other
BODY shall prescribe in such ordinance
or over no such franchise shall be granted
for period exceeding fifteen years; pro-
Vided that every such ordinance shall re-
Qufre the grantee therein named at all
time to issue and, offer for sale upon its
cars within such city or village, at least
SIX tickets for % cents, each good for one
rare; within such city or village. and that
the breach of any condition in such ordi-
nance contained, SHALL at the election of
the body adopting the same, or it's sue
cessors, operate as a forfeiture thereof
force such forfeiture
( provided further that no exclusive right
to franchise shall be granted to any in
dlVidual company or corporation for the
use of such public streets or grounds nor
the Whole of any street or public ground !;
and provided further that such railways
and all the property of the owners Of
such railways connected Herewith shall
be subject to the right of such councils
or other governing body of the payment
into the city or village treasury as the
case may be in lieu of all other taxation
SO far as such city or village is con-
cerned of such proportion of the gross
earnings of such railway as shall be
equivalent to the proportion of the taxes
belonging to such city or village imposed
upon other property therein, which pro-
portion may be changed from time to
time annually to correspond with the
changes in the rate of taxation of such
property.
Sec. 2. This act shall take effect and
be in force from and after it's passa ge' -
H. f. 312 along the same line which
legallzed and ratified acts of city con-
ellis in cities of less than 10000 inhabi-
tants where franchises had been granted
to street railway companies was also
recommended for passage. A proviso
added by the author stated that none of
the provisions should confer upon any
street railway company now existing