Jamestown weekly alert. [volume] (Jamestown, Stutsman County, D.T. [N.D.]) 1882-1925, 1915-01-28
SENATE fAVORS new
INSANE ASYLUM
Opposition Led by Sen. Steel
Of Stutsman

ouA uOdlou OeUdlo III IAc scudlc tuc
Gronvold bill providing for the es-
tablishment and location of second
asylum for the insane passed the up
per house by vote Of 81 in favor of
the bill and 16 against it.
The debate for the opposition was
lead by Senator Steel Of jamestown
and he opposed the bill on the
grounds that the state will be able
to get along for many years with
one institution. He held that the one
overhead charge and expense could
be made to care for the insane popu-
lation of the state in as good man
ner as if there were two institutions
located at different points and un-
der two different heads. Those in
favor of the new institution contend
ed that when a certain population
was reached in an institution of that
kind that the efficiency Of the man
agement went backwards. There
were a good many new points
brought out in the debate and it is
expected that there will be another
warm fight when the bill reaches the
house. The passage of the bill Is
said to be largely influenced by sup
port wanted for other proposed leg
islation.
Bills Passed by the Senate.
S. B. 19-Providing half rates for
farm machinery shipped by express.
8. B. III, Manufacturing legis-
lature of single body.
H. B. As. Rott-Levying gopher
tax against railroads.
| H. B. 57-Extending the power Of
removing officers.
House Opposes Bonding for Good
! Roads.
Bismarck. Jan. 26.-Following a
heated debate on the floor of the
house the representatives went on
record as not favoring, the giving to
the people Of tho state a chance to
vote on whether or not North Dako-
ta shall be bonded for the purpose
Of building good roads.
The house was In the committee Of
the whole with General E. A. Will
liams of Burleigh county in the chair
when T. Twitchell's bill, No. 1856,
came up for consideration. The bill
provides for a constitutional amend
ment and II accepted by the people
would provide a means whereby the
people of the state would be allowed
to vote on the question of bonding
the state for sum sufficient to start
building good roads. Twitchell
spoke in support Of the bill, taking
the stand that generations to come
should bear part of the burden Of the
good roads in the state, as they would
benefit to greater extent than
would the present residents of the
state. He said that the passing Of
the bill would show whether or not
we favored a good sound business
like method Of doing business or
whether we were satisfied to go along
the way we were at present and
showed that under the bill he pro-
posed we could borrow money for 4
per cent. while under other methods
we would have to pay Z or per
cent.
Burnett of Traill opposed the bill
on the grounds that he believed it
was an entering wedge for the bond
ing of the state. He made no bones
about calling the bill vicious meas
ure and thought it was a grave dan
ger to the state. There was a heat
ed controversy between Twitchell
and Burnett as to the virtues of the
bill.
Ness was opposed to the bill on
the grounds that there we're other
methods Of raising money for good
roads and that it was not meas
ure that was a beneit to the farmer.
Grow was for the bill and ad-
vanced his reasons in q clear and
llogicsl manner. This Is the first
time Mr.. Grow has made fight on
any bill and he created q good i'm
preston with his Straightforward
manner Of argument.
Dixon of Rolette was opposed to
Ii the bill and thought road building
should commence in the township,
while Carney was of the opposite
opinion and stated many instances
where good roads have been obtained
only when the state took the matter
in hand and started something. Mr..
Grow, in speaking second time,
showed that the republican party In
their platform stood for good roads
and that the goYernor in his message
49,