The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1905-02-09
LABOR BILL" Is
LOST in HOUSE
Cromar's Boiler Measure Defeated
After Hard Fight.
FINAL VOTE "a TO II
ROBERTS INTRODUCES FAR.
REACHING ROADS BILL.

ROBERTS INTRODUCES FAR.
REACHING ROADS BILL.
After motion TO strike out the en-
acting clause had failed by a vote OF
Il to 20, house bill No. 30, by Cromar
providing for the appointment of 2
state boiler inspector. was defeated in
the house yesterday. the final vote OF
passage being: Ayes, Il: nays, p. The
measure was lost through the Topping
over of Daily, Hawley and Wilson. The
three last-named voted against strik-
ing out the enactment clause. but OPP
posed the bill in the end. Vaughan
who voted against striking out the en-
actment clause, was absent when roll
was called on the passage of the meas
ure. while J. a. Anderson, who was
absent in the former instance, was pres
eut and supported the bill when it
came up for final passage.
While Cromar and other supporters
OF the measure realized that they had
hard fight on their hands. defeat
came as a surprise following. as it did
several amendments in Difference 10
members who were not entirely salts
fed with the original bill.
Cromar Gives His Reasons.
House bill No. 80 had been made the
special order of business for 3 D. m.
Cromar opened in support of his bill
saying that he had been requested by
persons employed in mines and facto-
Ties i'm all parts of the state to urge its
passage. In thirty-eight states of the
Union, he said. such a measure was
now in force. In Colorado, it had been
found q good Investment, both from the
point of protection to property and OF
income to the state. He quoted from
the report of the state boiler inspector
of Colorado. showing that in 1898 the
fees had aggregated 80. 200. A large
proportion Of boilers examined, the re-
port stated, had been found unsafe
Joseph sought to have an amend
ment' inserted to the effect that incor-
porated cities and towns already hav-
ing inspectors would not come within
the jurisdiction of the state boiler in
speCtOr. Kinney called his attention q
the fact that the bill already provided
FOR this. Ar amendment by Roberts
carried, changing the salary of the in
spector from $1,000 to 81 800 per annum
The debate see-sawed back and forth
for an hour or more. time being spent
in discussing useless amendments.
Tolton opposed the bill and made a
motion TO strike out the enacting
clause.
What Richards Said-and Did.
1t was here that Richards furnished
something that he doesn't mean to say
and then do something he doesn't mean
10 do. He rose to explain" his vote on
the motion 10 strike out the enacting
clause.
while not in favor of the bill at
first, he said. Mr.. Cromar has worked
so hard for its success that 1 consider
II only fair to support him at this time.
Let's give the bill a chance.
Mr.. Speaker, I vote aye"
Thus did the representative from Da-
Wis support the measure. He afford
ed the house an opportunity to smile,
anyhow, which is more. than some of
the argument specialists did.
Several proposed amendments by Jo-
seph. II was said during postmOrtem,
after adjournment. on the houses &C
ton. helped give the bill its quietus.
Joseph wanted practically TO jam new
bill i'm between provisions of Cromar's
measure. His propositions. in the main.
fell through but they served to tire the
house of the bill and when the rollcall
was taken on final passage, the lineup
was as follows: Ayes A Anderson.
Cromar, Edward. Fishburn, Hone.
Hopes, Jones, Joseph, Kinney. Kucb-
Ter, Marks. MCCrea, Pancake. Roberts,
Stewart. StOOkey and Speaker Hull.
Nays-Allen, y. Y. Anderson, Carroll.
Christensen. Gotham, Curtin, Daley,
Dean, Gundry. Hawley, Johnson. Luz
Their. Lyman. Merrill, Miller. Pace,
Peterson, Richards SimOns. Spencer.
Stringham, Thompson, TOltOn and Will
son.
The previous vote. taken on the prop
ositiOn to strike out the enactment
clause, was much closer, Speaker Hull
casting the deciding vote. There were
twenty ayes as against twenty-one
nays Wilson wanted TO know if he
could pair with an absent member.
During the debate on the passage of
no n rrrf Hfar- a1-rs
spoke for the bill i'm addition TO those
NAMED, While Thompson, Gundry and
Merrill opposed it,
Roberts Road Bill.
Roberts introduced his pet measure
thouse bill No. 13D yesterday. relating
10 the furtherance of good roads in the
state by means of state and county CO.
operation. The bill contains a number
or striking features. one OF Whichs con-
Germs the use Of convict labor in pre-
pairing road material and in building
highways
The first part OF section l reads for
the furtherance Of good roads, the pub
Tic highways. roads. streets. avenues
and lanes outside of Incorporated cities
aud towns are sysJematized into side
walk. roadway. tree space. ditch space.
curb lines and fence lines" The bill
then goes on to specify in detail the di-
Jueusieus and relative positions Of curb
lines. fence lines. etc The first eight
sections are consumed i'm roads, bridges
ard Gume specifications.
Representative Roberts pointed out
yesterday the following important sec
tons i'm his bill:
Section makes il unlawful for any
users of water from a ditch. stream or
7vell. etc. TO permit water to run waste
upon any public highway. etc. so as
10 prevent the use Of the highway.
cause pools of water. or act to the
danger or annoyance of the public.
Section 10 makes refusal or neglect
10 comply with any directions or speci-
1ications issued by the state. with re-
Eard to good roads. misdemeanOr.
Section II provides that convict Ia
Eor may be utilized in providing mate
rial or for constructing roads" State
and county prisoners may be employed
under the necessary restrictions. No
prisoner. however. under sentence of
ten years or more. may be allowed to
labor i'm the actual construction of a
road or TO provide material excepting
within the prison limits.
Section II provides that whenever
any road is constructed i'm county at
the expense. partially or wholly. Of the
state the work of construction shall be
under the supervision of the board Of