Arizona republican., 1909-03-16
WEAK SPOTS
 DESIGNATED Why the Governor Vetoed the
 Segregation Bill
 D|SAPPROV|NG MESSAGES. In Most Cases the Bills Were Passed Notwithstanding. The Council Finds a Modus Vivendi For the North and the South Sides.
D|SAPPROV|NG MESSAGES

nor yesterday vetoed the Hightower
 segregation bill. His objection was not to the principle of segregation. but to certain features of the bill. his mes sage indicating that if his objections should be met. he would approve the bill. There were two features of the bill to which the governor especially objected. One was that it left no plan by which expression could be given to the sentiments of the people regarding prohibition in justices precincts which happen to include incorporated towns. Thus there would be no remedy against wayside inns and road houses in such precincts outside the limits of the towns. Another objection was that the bill took out of the hands of the boards of supervisors the power to order local option elections on their own motion.
 It is understood that a bill will be offered today designed to meet the ob- jections of the governor. The prohi- bition element made an effort to put an end to all further legislation on this subject at once by bringing to a vote the question of passing the bill over the governors veto They were well aware that that could not be done. but Mir Sutter, the chief advocate of segregation legislation. secured the commitment of the veto and the bill to the committee on territorial affairs by a vote of 14 to 9. thus postponing the final test.
 With the aid of a part of the repub lican strength. it will be possible to put a bill through under a suspension of the rules, so that at this writing it is probable that there will be segrega ton legislation after all.
 Bridge Legislation.
 The council disposed eof the bridge question yesterday in a manner par tially satisfactory to both sides and not entirely to the satisfaction of either. It first passed the house bill providing for the location of a bridge at Tempe and across the Agua Fria, though the bill was amended so as to provide for the raising of the money by tax levies instead of by bond issues. as was orig inally contemplated, though the orig inal amounts are provided fOr-S60, 900 fer the Tempe bridge, and S30.000 for the Agua Fria bridge. The amend ment further provides for the submis- sion to the voters whether there shall be any levy at all. If a majority of the voters decide against it, the bridge proposition fails as to the locations mentioned in the bill.
 This bill was followed by the pas sage of another, offered by MT. O'Neill, requiring the board of supervisors of any county, on a petition signed by 100 taxpayers, to submit the question of levying a tax for the building of bridge across any non-navigable stream. The question of the location may be submitted at the same time.
 Whether the house will accept the council amendments to its bill remains to be seen. but it is thought that it will as neither party to the present controversy is inclined to oppose R.
 Forbidden Legislation.
 In addition to the veto of the High tower segregation bill. Governor Kib- bey yesterday made known to each house his disapproval of several other measures. In all cases but one the l bills were passed over his veto. That | bill was one introduced by Mir. Tobey l arranging a scale of licenses for the | atrical companies, the scale graduated | according to the size of the towns | The plan was held by the governor to | be inconsistent That view was sus- tained by the house without a dissent 1 ing voice.
 The governor vetoes the house bill | fixing the rate of interest to be paid | by banks on deposits of county and | territorial funds at per cent. on the | ground that such a law would result in the banks. in most cases, refusing | to accept the money at all, to the em- of the territorial and | treasurers. The governor point ed out that the banks had not always been extremely desirous of accepting | the money at i per cent. This bill was passed over the veto by a party vote.
 Mir. Duffy's bill. providing for ease ment of mining claims, was vetoed on the ground that it conferred a right without providing any compensation to the owner of the property over which the right was granted. The house was not quite sure of it's position on this bill, and no immediate action was talk en on the veto which with the bill was passed until this morning.
 The council -boleta bill was ve- toed on the ground that it contem- plated denial of the right of contract and that it was probably unconstitu- tional. That went over the veto by a l. party vote.
 The same course was taken in the veto of the bill by Mir Weedin. for