The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-03-15
get back his property. The McGill bill
allowed the council toisti0- the amount
FLOUR CITY BILLS KILLED.
,
Tri-Ctty Delegations Viewed Them
With Something Like Alarm. 81,

Iri-C1ty Delegations viewed Them
With Something Like Alarm. ev
A fifteen-minute session of the Ram
sey, Hennepin and st. Louis delegations
was held at noon yesterday and four bills
recommended for indefinite postpone
ment.
II. F.. s440, by Mr.. Jackson (Rep.), of
Ramsey, authorized .cityacouncils in cities
of over $4,000 inhabitants to order side
walks and streets graded without petit
lions Of property owners.
w. Ely Bramhall of st. Paul. argued
for the passage of the bill, showing an
instance where it would Sbe of advantage
to the residents of st. Pauk The owners
of the Nichols estate had given to the
city a forty-foot street between Summit
avenue and Iglehart street, but this could
not be opened as the heirs refused to
petition for the same, and the council
had no power The Improvement which
would connect Igehart with Sixth street
was desired by the city and If the bill
allowing the council to order the streets
graded without petition the work could
be DONE
Mr. Dunn (Rep.), of Ramsey, objected,
and argued that If the bill was passed 1t
would allow the council to order miles
of cement sidewalks. The present pro-
vision in the charter, requiring petit
ton to grade street and lay sidewalks,
while it might work a hardship in some
cases was wise one and prevented prop
erty owners from becoming bankrupt by
sidewalk and grading assessments.
Mr.. Mallory -Rep.) objected to the bill
on the same ground and the measure was
recommended for indefinite postpone
ment.
II. F. 1903, by Mr.. DwinneH Rep), of
Hennepin, providing for the city remov-
ing snow and ice from sidewalks and
assessing the cost against the abutting
property, was opposed by Mr.. Winston
Oem), of Hennepin; Mr.. Dunn (Rep.),
of Ramsey, and Mr.. .Lydiard Rep), Of
Hennepin.
Mr.. Winston claimed that the streets
were very generally cleared in Mime
apolis and he objected to property own
ers being burdened with any more taxes.
Mr.. Lydiard took the same view, saying
that If more burdens were placed on the
property owners in Minneapolis the city
might as well take the property.
Mr. Dunn took the ground that it would
cost more to get the assessments into
judgment twice over than the original
expense of doing the work.
Mr.. Dwinnell held that the work should
be done the same as street sprinkling
The owners of improved property would
not be liable as they now cleaned their
walks, but 1t would assure the cleaning
of the walks in front of property owned
by non-residents. AS it was now the city
| was forced into court and made to pay
| damages for injuries received by reason
of the walks not being cleaned. The
| majority of the delegation favored the
indefinite postponement Of the bill
! H. f. 293, by Mr.. Lampe (Union), Of
Hennepin, authorizing cities of over 3d.
| COO inhabitants to make contracts with
electric light companies for five years
and providing that plants erected at a
| cost of $4,000 could be sold to the city
at the end of the five years contract for
| 81, was recommended for indefinite post
ponement.
III. F. sos, by Mr.. Deming Rep.), of
Hennepin, authorizing park boards to
condemn building easements fifty feet
| from parkways, was also recommended
| for indefinite postponement