The Saint Paul globe., 1899-03-29
is TIED In A TANGLE
JACOBSON GROSS EARNINGS BILL
TIED IN A SENATORIAL
HARD KNOT
ON A PARLIAMENTARY POINT

| Authorities Differ as to the Status of
the Bill-Its Opponents Say 1t Is
Dead for All Time, While Others
Contend That a Majority Vote of
| Quorum May Resuscitate 1t at
Any Time.
| Any prospect Of the passage of the ia
! cobson BILL increasing the gross earnings
| tax on railroad companies from 3 to 4
| per cent, was seriously endangered in a
parliamentary ENHANCEMENT, which re-
| suited at the close Of the senate debate
| on the bill late yesterday afternoon.
| 1t was felt by all In the senate that
| the vote on the question was bound to be
close, and, consequently, when call of
the senate was ordered, after days de-
| bate, the watch on the count was un-
usually close
1t was neck and neck to the bottom of
| the list, and Senator Halvorson, the lead
er of the fight for the bill, demanded the
call of the absentees, some OF the sena-
| tors present having omitted to vote. Sen
ator Underleak (Rep), of Olmsted, who
had been busy at his desk, seemed to be
| the one aimed at in the call, and he voted
no, making the vote 81 for the adoption
| of the report Indefinitely postponing the
| bill and 80 against 1t.
| Senator MCGOWAN Dem), of Henne-
pin, then began a series Of somersaults
which were interesting, to say the least.
! He had voted against the report. He
| changed his vote to yes. which would put
! him in position to move reconsidera-
| tion of the vote, making 1t then 1928.
| Senator Stockwell Dem.), also Of Hen
| nepin, who had the same thing In mind,
| asked his senatorial colleague point blank
| if 1t was for the purpose of moving re-
consideration.
Senator MCGOWAN replied that it was,
and started into explain his vote, when
he was called to order on point of or
der raised by Senator Greer (Rep.), of
Wabasha.
Then the vote was announced.
Senator Greer was on his feet in an
instant and moved that the vote by which
the report Of the judiciary committee was
adopted be reconsidered
The friends of the bill had planned to
have it reconsidered at another time
when the two absentees could be put on
record, for while the thirty-one votes
could Indefinitely postpone the bill, there
were still thirty-two others senators who
might vote for it if they could ever be
gotten together at one I1ne.
Senator MCGOWAN moved to lay the
motion to reconsider on the table.
Greer was placid. He had few cards
up his sleeve, figuratively speaking.
Lieut.. Gov. Smith put the motion to
lie on the table, and it was adopted
unanimously.
The senate adjourned Immediately, but
not before the senator from Wabasha
had fished a copy Of Car Reeds rules out
Of fc dccE md haf h0 a
had turnbled to the fact that the bill was
in very embarrassing position, to put
1t mildly.
Senator MCGOWAN insisted that the mo-
ton to reconsider could be taken from
the table at any time, by a majority vote
Of the senate.
Senator Greer produced Reeds rules,
for the house. which provided with ap
parent eXplicitness that the house might
suppress reconsideration and debate alike
by the adoption Of motion to lay on the
table the motion to reconsider.
The rules of the Minnesota senate are
vague on the point. AS to reconsidera-
ton, beside fixing a limit Of two days
for motion to reconsider a vote, rule
q says: "A motion for reconsideration,
being put and lost shall not be renewed"
In the order of proceedings of the SEN
ate there is as the twelfth order of bust-
| ness motions to take up bills, orders, and
other business from the table.
The motion not having been put and
lost, the Jacobson bill apparently does
not fall within rule a. and the question
then arises, is a motion to reconsider
within the classification of "other busi-
| ness?
The senate had determined that in
| cases where the senate rules do not spe-
| officially apply, Jefferson's Manual shall
| be its parliamentary guide.
1hffcrcNn'c &c otl 70 10
| point.
| Lieut.. Gov. Smith has shown himself
| familiar with the Reed rules, and in the
| event that he should decide that the
| Reed rule was sufficiently well grounded
| as parliamentary authority to warrant
| him in declaring the motion to take from
| the table out of order, the only recourse
| Of the friends Of The bill would be to ap-
| peal from the decision Of the chair.
| 1t is contended that the Reed rules have
| no more application to the proceedings of
| the Minnesota senate than the rule of
| three, and If this view is inclined to by
| the lieutenant governor, then the bill
may be taken up at any time after the
| calendar for the day is passed on a ma
also be taken up at any time on two
thirds vote of the senate, but this pos
sibility seems to be out of the question.
| STORY OF THE DEBATE.
Senator Halvorson Rep.), of Lac qui
| Parle, took advantage Of the fullness of
| the senate to move that the report of the
| Judiciary committee on the Jacobson rail-
road gross earnings tax bill be not
| adopted. He said he did not feel strong
| enough to argue the bill at length but
| as some of the arguments were Of a con-
| stitutional character, he asked the con-
| sent of the president that the secretary
| read certain state papers. These included
| the report of a minority of the senate
| committee on railroads of 1885 on the An
derson bill for the taxation Of unused
railroad lands, message of Gov. Austin
| to the state legislature in 1874, Gov Lind s
| letter of last Saturday, as published in
! The G e yesterday, and a message
| of Gov. Davis to the legislature back in
the '70S.
Senator Halvorson supplemented these
| arguments with the declaration that the
| railroads owned one-fourth of the prop
erty In the state, but paid only one
| eleventh of the taxes. The Illinois Cen
trail, he said, paid per cent gross earn
ings tax, and the other roads paid an
average of s437 a mile
| Senator Halvorson read from the his
| tory of railroad legislation in Michigan
showing a progressive tendency to keer
the tax on railroads proportionate to the
taxes on other property. He insisted
that If Minnesota taxed the railroads on
the valuation of it's stocks and bonds II
would be fair, and would result in a
| greatly increased payment Of taxes by
the railroads. Even If the roads were
assessed on valuation per mile one.
third of the valuation on which their
rates were based, the state would gair
S2,OOO,0O0 annually. 1t was the duty OF