The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1941-03-12
Legislative
CONTINUED from Page one)

Continued from Page One)
Guiding the entire staff of the Attor-
ney Generals office and the Governor.
They were all unable to state how the
omission of this word would effect the
sewing room projects. 1t was the
opinion of the progressive block that
the omission of this word would be
the means of closing these projects
down. They therefore moved that
the conference committee be dis
charged and new committee be ap-
pointed This motion was voted down
and the original motion to accept the
conference committee report was put.
The roll call on this motion is ap-
pended hereto: 1t may be noted that
| it included in the list of those voting
with the progressive block were some
reactionaries who were unable to
stomach the Senate amendments. The
vote was on the amendments:
Ayes-Ahern, Allen, Anderson, An
son, Antrim, Armstrong, Aronson,
Ballard, Banks, Blenkner, Burke,
Busch, Byrne, Carlson, Cummings,
Curran, Dillavou, Dougherty, Eggen-
berger, Esp, Fewkes, Flock, Forbregd,
Freshman, Goodwin, Green, Hageman,
Hammond, Harken, Hazelbaker, Horri-
gan, Hunter, James, Kemmis, Kirsch-
er, LaBonte, Laubach, Lehrkind, Lip
pard, Loughran, Lowe, Lynch, Nc
Daniel, McMichael, Martin of Madi-
son, Morrow, Newell, O'Brien, O'Con-
nor, Oliver, Parker of Wibaux, Potter,
Rasmussen, Scofield, Scott, Simpson,
Stevens, Toomey, Tyler. Williams, and
Wilson. Total, 81.
Those voting against the acceptance
of the conference committee report
were: Beazley Beck, Bjorneby, Can
non, Clifford, Dahlquist, Davey, Fried,
Gunderson, Harrison, Hess, McGreev-
ey, McKenna, Martin of Fergus, Mer-
min, Nash, Nelson, Petersen, Saylor,
Spiegel, Toole, Vanek, Winters Zuck,
and Stromnes Total, %.
Absent and not voting: Castles,
Cole, Gebhardt, Helding, Miller, Muir
ray, Parker of Flathead, Parker of
Cascade, Phelan, Reed, Rice, Roehl,
Tom, Watson, Welcome, and White
Total, 16.
The foregoing vote which concurred
in the Senate amendments left the
entire matter in a doubtful position.
The heads of the various political sub
divisions can COMPLETE any prof.
ects which have been sponsored
PRIOR to March Is, 1871. They may
also sponsor any project to be CON-
STRUGGLED during the fiscal year be-
ginning July 1, 1941 and ending June
80, 1912. This leaves the sewing prof.
ects in a precarious position. If the
levy for them was not made prior to
March Is, 1871, it is possible that they
will have to close until the start OF
the new period of July l, 1941 to June
80, 1912. There is also the possibility
that this project will not be con-
strued as construction as the word
Operate" was omitted. If the legal
lights as represented by the entire
staff of the Attorney Generals office
were not able to arrive at some favor
able opinion, there is great posi-
DilLJ Iudl Tic upl CiiC oOoit w IL No.
eide that a sewing room project is
not a construction" and they will be
closed
SYMPATHY-"Baa
Later-Perhaps realizing the seri-
BUSINESS of the omission of the word
operation" or perhaps 1t was the
valiant fighting of the small liberal
group which caused the change OF
heart; but, whatever the reason, a
motion prevailed that the measure be
brought back from the enrolling room
for the purpose Of amendment. The
bill was then put in the hands Of an
other conference committee which
added the words "and sewing room
projects" The conference commit
tees report was thereupon adopted.
The addition Of these words make it
evident to any court that 1t was the
intention of the legislature to continue
the operation Of these projects.