Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1913-02-26

Special Legislative Letter to the Willmar Tribune
BY John Lawson

handed it. The exclusion Of the cit
les from proportionate representa-
ton was justified by the vote cast
for the seven senator amendment
which he claimed indicated that q
large majority Of the peopl, favor
limiting urban representation, and
that in such a matter the will Of the
people should be supreme. Giving to.
the northern counties the representa-
ton accorded in the Warner bill
would, by reason Of the limit put to
urban representation, give to them
even a greater representation than
that accorded in that measure.
TROUBLE ANTICIPATED IN THE
Il " SENATE. =s.= z.zsG .#=
However Northern Minnesota was
not seduced by, the siren song, as the
subsequent vote showed. While in
individual and segregated cases it
may appear to work injustice, the
intent Of the Warner bill to deal fair
ly with all parts Of the state is APP
parent and evidently appealed to the
members sense Of fair play, as is in.
Dictated by the vote. However, that
is not saying that the senate will
look at the matter just as the house
did. Indeed the indications are that
the Warner bill will have far from
clear sailing in the upper branch.
Whether it will get through at all is
at this time an open question, and if
it does radical changes may be look
ed for. Threats have been heard
that unless concessions are made to
rural representation greater than
those accorded by Mr.. Warner things
are going to happen, and it is still
entirely too soon to predict that the
enemies Of honest reapportionment
are yet at the end Of their resources.
OPPOSITION TO THE GOOD
ROADS BILL.
Quite little opposition has de-
veloped to Bob Dunn's good roads
bill, the consideration Of which has
been deferred. There are those who
do not like the idea Of people not
being allowed to work out their road
taxes who prefer the system Of dis
trict to that of township overseers.
This opposition is honest and may be
placated. At all events it is doubt
full if Mr.. Dunn would insist on either
Of the above provisions to which OBJ
lection is made if he thought aban-
doning them would be necessary to
insure favorable vote. But there
are objections which he is determin-
ed to resist to the extent of aban-
doning the measure if those who
make them can carry their point and
have the bill amended to comply with
their wishes. -.
COUNTY ROAD BONDS. !.
These provisions relate to the
bonding of counties to raise money
to be used for road purposes. Mr..
:Dunn's bill provides that no county
can bond itself for more than Is per
cent of the assessed valuation to
raise money to build roads. Under
the Elwell law no limit is set. I'M
der the Dunn bill no bonds can be
issued unless the people vote them.
Under the Elwen law a majority Of
the county commissioners can issue
road bonds or bridge bonds without
the consent of the people. 1t can
readily be understood whv provisions
Of this sort would not appeal to con-
struction companies or bridge COM
panies who had taken pains to cult
vate friendly relations with county
boards in the hope Of being able to
share literally in the proceeds Of the
one mill road tax and in the new
road building enterprises that would
be encouraged thereby. "Why," say
| IAo4 AAAoAuo, IL yOu uSlSt tudt ~
bonds can be issued unless the PEG.
pie vote them, for all practical pur.
poses you prohibit the issue Of road
bonds altogether. You can never &c
the people to vote for bonding tn.
county for road that is of no direc
benefit to them, no matter the ad
vantage it might be to other sections
Mr.. Dunn's reply to this is that j
the people do not wish to vote bond
surely such legislation should not b
approved which authorizes major
! r. SCHOOL
k:g2X5 : s