The Saint Paul globe., 1899-03-21

|
of Trust Companies stirs Up Quite
a Lively Debate-Charges Are
Made That the Corporations Are
Dabbling In Current LegisIation
Routine of the House.
The house went down the line on the
calendar yesterday until all the house
bills had been disposed of and then took
up general orders. Fifteen bills were
passed and then Mr.. jacobson suggested
that it would be well to advance the
house bills on general orders to the cal
endar instead of taking time to pass SEN
ate bills.
This suggestion was adopted but little
headway was made owing to discussion
on three of the bills in committee of the
| whole.
Mr.. Wheaton Rep). of Hennepin, gain
ed signal victory over Mr.. Jacobson
Rep} of Lac qui Parle, in securing the
recommendation for passage of his five
sixths jury bill.
The measure provides that after being
out twelve hours without reaching an
agreement jury in civil action can
bring In verdict if ten of the dozen
| jurors can agree on one
| Mr.. wheaton made one of his oratori-
cal outbursts in support of the measure,
| saying that it was badly needed in his
| county, where a great monopoly had
stepped into the jury box and DETECTED
the course of Justice Justice had been
blinded by money, and the passage of the
| Dill would prevent Slurs being cast on the
courts and prevent the influence of the
corporate money power being felt in the
| jury box.
.t1cOhSnn of n
protested against the passage of the bill
Ihe records, he said, showed that 95 per
cent OF the civil actions brought in the
courts of the state were by the poor
against the rich. The only demand for a
| change from the present jury system was
by attorneys interested in personal injury
| cases, and these were but small mart
| of the litigation
Mr.. Yale Rep.), of Winona, favored
the bill on the ground that the people of
the state had adopted a constitutional
amendment allowing five-sixths of a turv
to return a verdict, and if the people
wanted the law the legislature should
certainty stand ready to give them one
Mr. Sander (Rep), of Sib!ey declared
| that the bill would not only be a good
thlng for the people, but it would also as
sist materially in the disposition of cases
MI Dunn Rep.), of Ramsey, said the
Dill was needed, as the corruption Of
! jurors was appalling.
Mr.. Wheaton informed the house that
the present system was IAN ancient
| heritage of antiquity" powerful and
| gigantic corporation had agents to take
the views OF the jury panel as soon as it
was drawn and see If some of the men
| were not susceptible to influence
| Mr ROBERTS (Rep.), of Hennepin fa-
vored the bill. and took the ground that
the talk made by Mr.. jacobson might
have been all right 200 years ago, but it
| mo- he I,;1J u.
| interests of the poor man, and should
| pass.
1t was recommended to pass by a de-
cisive vote.
HI. F. "a, by Mr.. Wheaton, was recon-
mended for indefinite postponement 1t
| allowed exceptions to charges made by
| judges to juries within ten days after the
charge had been made.
ON BRUSLETTEN BILL.
Messrs Roberts, Fosnes and Dwinnen
| engaged in warm argument over the
| BruSletten bill and Mr.. Fosnes intimated
very strongly that undue influence had
been brought upon the judiciary COM
mittee to secure the defeat of the meas
| ure.
The bill provides that trust companies
when appointed administrators or guar
dians ef estates shall file bond or
surety bond the same as individuals.
Mr.. Fosnes contended that the trust
| companies were no better than individu-
| ais and it should be passed. Since it had
been introduced the trust companies had
put In couple of bills with the purpose
| of killing the one introduced by Mr.
Brusietten The trust companies had
charge of estates valued at millions of
dollars and there was no reason why they
should not give bonds the same as indi-
vidual administrators
| Mr.. Roberts insisted that the bill was
al unjust one and that 1t would work an
injury to trust companies. A bill which
had been introduced by him, now on GEN
| eral orders, was much fairer measure
and he suggested that the Brusletten bill
be postponed and his measure passed.
| Mr.. Fosnes caused some excitement by
saying Roth of your bills were drawn
by trust companies There was no OBJ
lection to the bill under consideration
when 1t was before the judiciary COM
m1ttee until after the ATTORNEYS for the
trust companies had heard the measure
and then as a result the bills introduced
by you were drafted and presented"
Mr.. Roberts denied this, but Mr. Fosnes
insisted that his statement was correct
Mr.. Dwinnell then informed the house
that Mr. Fosnes had poor recollection
of the proceedings before the Judiciary
committee, as the records showed that
the Brusletten bill had been recommended
for indefinite postponement. The bill
would simply make business for foreign
vided that officers of trust companies
could not give individual bonds they
would be forced if the bill passed, to Sc
cure surety bonds. The expense of these
would not be paid by the trust companies
but by the persons interested in estates
Mr.. Fosnes expressed surprise that Mr.
| Dwinnell should attempt to state what
was not the fact about the action of the
judiciary committee on the BILL The
committee, he said, had recommended the
bill te pass and it was not until after a
representative of Minneapolis trust
company had appeared was that action
reconsidered and the Roberts bills pre-
sented
The contention of Mr.. Fosnes was cor
roborated by Mr. Wallace (Rep.), of Hen
nepin, who informed the house that the
judiciary committee, of which he was a
member had recommended the bill for
passage. but after Mr.. Morton, repre-
sentative Of a Minneapolis trust com