Willmar tribune., 1899-09-20

l.uu..u.1.l
year " no will practice what he
3 and his name won't be,
John Lind either ;;@,s:: s. II 81. .5g..
Now, to the governors veto of the
insane hospital bill. Ii, my original
question asked "why did he sign
the second hospital bill after vetoing
the first? What is the difference in
the bills? You called the first a
steal, now tell us the difference In
order that the reader may not get
mixed up ON this proposition I will
reproduce your reply.
Gov. Lind vetoed the first and
ONLY HOSPITAL bill passed by the leg
islature because the state already
had all the hospital room needed for
many years to come. What was
really needed was an asylum for the
chronic insane. Gov. Lind had
shown to. the legislature that the
chronic insane could be better cared
for at TN asylum where work can he
provided for them. 1t would cost
for less to SO keep, them. They need
no more medical. attendance than
sane persons. NOtwithst anding
these arguments, the legislature pro-
vided for the immediate expenditure
OF $25O.OOO for hospital at Anoka,
and provided for another at Hast
ings. If expending Il quarter of a
million dollars on Unnecessary build
ings is not "steal," we fail to faith.
ON the meaning of that word.
The governor signed the second
bill because it was a bill for asylums
and not hospitals. While he would
have preferred to have the county
system of caring for the chronic in.
sane, he was forced to accept this
bill as the only thing to be obtained
from that Legislature, and the de-
mand for asylum room was 80 i'm
perative that the matter could not
be deferred until the meeting of the
next legislature. The bill provided
for building asylums at Anoka anC
Hastings, at a cost of $125, 900. Thus
the veto saved at least $l25,000 tt
start with, not to mention the differ
ence in cost of maintaining thu
buildings and caring for the unfOrtu
l.. l.
built on too grand scale to take il
little difference like that, or did h,
trade on the ignorance of ordinary
everyday individuals like us?
Mr.. Editor, my friend Lawson dis
cusses this question with the promp
titude OF a veteran, but pardon M
for suggesting that he is talking OF
subject as foreign to him as the lit
erary productions of Homer.
am fortunate to possess lette
from Hon. c: F. Staples, representa-
tive from Dakota county, in whic]
he sta tes the difference in the tw,
bills. 1t follows:
ST. PAUL, Mimi, Aug. 7, 90
Hon: Henry Feig.
Raymond, MINI.
MY DEAR MIR. FE1G:-Am very sol
ry OF this delay in reply to yours G
July Oath, but have been away an
only returned yesterday.
| In brief, the first bill simply re
affirmed the location of the AnOk
site and located new site on sam
site as the fight was over, UpprOpr
ating $4,000 for payment of site
No other appropriation was carrie
in the bill. That bill was vetoed.
The second bill reatf1rmed the Anc
ka site and located one on some Ga
acres at Hastings, appropriatin
$1,000 for payment of the land
Then it was provided that building
to accommodate 200 patients a
AnOka and 200 patients at Hasting
should be Immediately put up an
equipped, and 1925, 900 was appropr
ated for this purpose.
The first bill provided that builc
ings should be erected at AnOka, bu
left the amount Of appropriate
to be made in the omnibus bill b
the committee.
Hoping this Information meet
your wishes, | will add the secOn
bill suits the Hastings people niue
better than the first, for it was YER
uncertain as to when, If ever, the
would get any buildings.
Trus ting this finds you we'll, l II
main, Very truly yours,
| G.. F. STAPLES.
Here, Mr.. Editor, we have some il
format ton from a man who was o
the ground. Mr.. Staples has mad
the question of caring for the insan
a particular study; he is one of thos
political economists who alway
combine the cheap and the practica
He also took particular interest i
this matter because of the interest
of Hastings.
Now, comes Mr.. Staples and i,
forms us that the first bill vetoed b
Governor Lind only carried an az
preparation Of $4,000, while IN
friend Vicky dished up the story tha
it provided for the Immediate e1
penditure of $250,00O." Quite a di
ference, you will observe kind reader
between $4,000 and $25O,O0O! Onl
1926 900 difference. And this was til
bill Vickey said was a "steal.' If t
pass Hastings Anoka hospital bi
carrying an appropriation of $500
is ''steal," then what would m
dear friend Lawson coll Hastings
Anoka bill carrying an appropris
ton of $140,000. The amount pal
for the Hastings site is the same i
the two bills (I5,O0o). Is this tn
''steal" you had in view when 20
lauded the governor for vetoing tn
first bill? 1t must have been for
was the only appropriation carrie
in the bill. Now, friend Vicky, if til
first was a ''steal' it was only
$15, 900 steal, but the second was
$l4O,O "steal' and this, thanks
the action of reform gOYernOr an