The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1927-02-01

because our official paper has taken
a stand against such legislation and
has thus weakened its appeal with
the League forces. However, ! am
not seeking the support Of either
faction as faction for this bill, but
welcome such support as it may re-
ceive regardless Of from where it
may come, have several letters from
WAS commencing me for my support
Of this bill, and hope that the
members Of both factions who sec
such legislation as needed will give
it their support. The bill has no
connection with the announced prin.
ciples of either faction, and there is
nothing in its nature that should
have it opposed by either body.
feel that greater care should be
taken in the education of young
people. Evil is rapidly growing in
America and greater disrespect is
developing for the teachings Of the
Bible. II this continues I feel that
the very foundations of our govern
ment will be shaken and perhaps des-
troyed.
L: o. RICHARDSON,
Representative, Adams county.
POWER BELONGS TO LECIsLA-
TURE
Bismarck. N. D.,
January 81, 1927.
Editor Tribune:
Your paper recently quoted Mr..
Livdahl, one Of the members Of our
bureau. to the effect that senate bill
65 was vague, indefinite, haphazard-
~ drawn, and leaves the bureau al
most imperative"
trust that you did not quote him
correctly, or that he pointed out in
detail to the committee the reasons
for such statements, because it is my
impression that the members Of this
committee are not only inquisitive
about facts, they also read English
understandingly. For instance, some
Of them have already made compare
sons such as this:
The Law
"The bureau shall Immediately fix
and file its schedule Of specific bene-
fits" etc.
"And the following shall be the
schedule of specific benefits" etc.
AS they made the comparison they
concluded that the law gave the
bureau power to fix the schedule and
that the bill takes that power away
from the administrative board, the
legislature properly assuming the
power that belongs to it under the
! constitution.
Mr.. Livdahl also favors a limitation
to $4,000 IF the amount is paid in
lump sum-"
Fortunately, evesy member of the
committee had before him at all times
the comparative table showing tho
benefits in all agricultural states,
and they could sec Immediately that
Mr.. Livdahi's memorandum leaves the
situation as it now is.
They have before them figures and
letters that indicate that the maxi
mum Of $500 in Minnesota means
the final total, and that if the amount
were paid in lump sum it would be
only about $1,000. They know, also,
that in Ohio, for instance. all sums
paid prior to death are deducted from
the death award.
For example: Claim No. 1882 at
Fargo had awards Of about $500
prior to the death Of the injured per.
son. Ohio's death limit is $4,000.
Hence. according to the letter from
the Ohio actuary, the widow would
there have received about $500.
The printed bill does contain some
minor errors, but these were all point
cd out to the chairman of the COM
mittee on January rs.
OF course it is hard to give up pow
er that you have once had, but the
| power to fix maximum schedules new
err should have been delegated to an
administrative board, because it is
purely legislative function, and the
legislature is the only body that has
any business exercising legislative
functions.
r. E. WENZEL,
| Commissioner.