The Hope pioneer. [volume] (Hope, N.D.) 1882-1964, 1917-04-26
TERMINAL ELEVATOR BILL
BY R. A. Lathrop.

By II. "A. Lathrop.
In discussing the terminal elevator
bill passed by the last Legislature and
vetoed by Gov. Frazier, it might be
we'll to give the terms of the bill and
compare 1t with the one which did not
pass the 1915 session. The bill pro-
posed two years ago limited the ex.
penditure to $4,000 and provided
that any project started under it had
to be in another state, limiting it to
one town in each state, namely st.
Paul and Superior. At that time the
terminal elevator bill had never been
made a campaign issue in a party
platform, the people having voted
two amendments, or enabling acts,
permitting building first out of the
state, and second, within the state,
and at that time there was no crystal
lied sentiment as to which was the
best place.
Last fall there was a direct pledge
in the party platforms to build an ele-
vator and also a direct pledge to sub
nit amendments to the people as to
whether they wished to try out flour
mills, packing plants, etc., and it was
specifcly stated in the campaign that
it al not the purpose to rush these
matters and attention was called to
the fact that it would take two legis-
lative sessions before they came to a
vote SO the people would have ample
time to consider them carefully.
Now let us turn to the provisions of
the bill passed this winter: 1t pro-
vided for a fund of $500, 600, or four
times the first bill. 1t provided for q
commission of seven members, four of
whom were appointed by the Govern
or, thus, with himself as member,
giving him control of FIVE out of the
seven members. 1t provided that the
sl2O, 600 or hand should form a part
of the fund, leaving $3.50, 900 to raise
by taxation for n year only, amount
ing to about % cents on an average
quarter section of land. The commits
sion was authorized to make q thoro
investigation, secure plans, sites, etc.,
and, If they deemed advisable, lease,
buy or build an elevator at any point
in either North Dakota, Minnesota or
Wisconsin. If, on the other hand, af-
ter investigation they felt it inadvis-
able to do any of these things, they
were not required to do so, but could
make the investigation and report
back their findings at the next session.
This clause as to makeing an investi-
CATION and report back their findings
at the next session. This clause as to
making an investigation was passed
through the house, being sponsored
by the League members, and when the
conference committee of six was ap-
pointed-composed of four League
members and two not members-they
drafted this investigation feature into
the senate terminal elevator bill, max
ing other slight changes, mostly ad-
m~inistrative. The bill came back with
a unanimous report of the conference
committee, passed without a vote
against it in the Senate and but one
vote against it in the House. The
Governor, in face of this and the plat
form on which he ran for office, felt
justified in vetoing it, and take it that
he was honest in doing the right thing
from his standpoint. The five rea-
SONS he gave sounded very much like
the arguments in the 1915 session ad-
vanced by those opposing the bill at
that time, and one cannot help bat
wonder, when the merits of the two
bills are compared, as to how the
governor would have voted had he
been q member of the house in 1915.
Further than this: 1t keeps one pref
ty busy, mentally, to figure out why a
member Who voted against q limited
bill in 1915 should be so roundly con
demnsd and nearly a whole campaign
built on this issue and three-fourths
OF the legislature thrown out of Office,
and now the Governor being upheld
by the same folks for vetoing q bill
passed with but one vote against ii
out of l62, and q bill that was so much
superior to the first that there was no
comparison between them. It 10 said,
"Politics make strange bed-fellows, u
and it might be said with equal truth
that political issues take strange flip.
fiona sOmnfimaa Dnrins tho oxnori.