The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, February 17, 1916, Page 8

EIGHT The Feople of North Dakota at the general election in 1912, by a four- to-one vote, adopted an amendment * to the state constitution permittin the construction and maintainance o a system of state-owned elevators in Wisconsin or Minnesota or in both those states. ; The thirteenth legislative assembly ©f North Dakota, which met in - Bis- marck in January, 1913, complying with the vote of the people, passed e bill levying a fax to ‘fay the cost of building equipping and maintaining the terminal elevator system approv- ed by the people and instucting. the state board of control to draw plans.. mnd specifications . for .the ~work make estimates of cost and recom- mend a site or sites, and report these things to the 1915 legislature. The 1913 legislature decided the terminal elevator question, but the people never got the “elevator. It - tecided to give the people what they had overwhelmingly “demanded. Its work was undone and the people be- " trayed by a piece of unrebuked trea- son probably unparalleled in the rec- ords of any state in the union. Refused Its Orders : The state board of control, .in- btructed by the legislature pursuant . to the vote of the people to carry out the initial work toward the con- struction of the terminal elevator system, refused to do this work. The board of control did not, as ordered under chapter 279, laws of 1913, sub- mit working plans and specifications for a terminal elevator; it did not, as ordered, draw up rules and regu- lations for the operation of such an elevator; it did not, as specifically ! instructed, make detailed estimates of cost of the elevator system and . propose methods of operation; it did- not, as directed by the legislature, . pursuant to vote of the people, rec- commend specifically a site or sites for the elevator. The members of this board thus violating the law were: R. S. Lewis, F. O. Brewster and J. W. Jackson. The board of control, a subordin- ate body charged merelfi with carry- ing out the orders of the 1913 legis- lature in regard to a policy already settled, brought in a report to the 1915 legislature recommending against a terminal elevator system and the legislature abandoned the plan. An exactly parallel case would be the following: A Parallel Case The stockholders of a corporation decide on a needed improvement and authorize the board of directors to make it. The board of directors make provisions for raising money for the improvement and instruct the archi- tect employed by the company to draw plans and specifications and make an estimate of cost. The archi- tect, a mere employe paid to carry out orders of the directors, refuses to draw plagg and specifications and make an estimmte of cost. He comes before the directors and tells them that the stockholders are wrong in wanting the improvement, which he’ says is not needed, and that the di- rectors are misguided in taking the preliminary steps toward the con- struction. He says the directors really don’t want plans and specifi- cations, for it would be unwise to build the improvement. So the im- provement is abandoned. The board of control of North Da- kota put itself exactly in the posi- tion of that architect. The board was not rebuked for this act of trea- son and insubordination, because the people of North Dakota had elected in 1914 a sycophant legislature, which met in January, 1915, at Bismarck. This legislature was subservient to the great vested- interests which would be damaged by a state-owned terminal elevator and it permitted a subordinate board to dictate its policy. People Betrayed 3 _ The house of representatives in committee of the whole heard the re- port and recommended the indefinite poit.;fionemex}t of %ou}sle bill No. 336, a bill carrying out the plan approv- ed by the 1913 session }t)o eregt? the terminal elevator system. The report of the committee of the whole was adopted by the house on February 20, 1915, and the bill indefinitely post- poned by a vote of 64 to 40, eight not voting or absent. And so the %etray- 2l of the people was complete. The history of the treminal eleva- tor movement begins in 1909. Sec- tion 202 of the state constitution provides that an amendment to the constitution shall be approved by two successive sessions of tfi before submitted to the people. The legislature ‘of 1909 initifted and ap- proved an amendment authorizin the legislature to erect a system o state-owned terminal elevators in the states of- Wisconsin or Minnesota or e legislature ' THE NONPARTISAN LEADER - How People Decided to Build an Elevator and State Officers " Were Ordered to Take the Initial Steps---How Those Officers Nulified the Plan, and How a Sycophant Leg- islature Steod. for It. both. The legislature of 1911 ap- proved this proposed amendment and it was submitted to the ‘people in 1912, being adopted by a:four-to-one vote. There was opposition to a ter- minal elevator system owned by North Dakota ‘eutside the borders of the state and the 1911 session of the legis- - lature initiated an amendment. to the riations, which recommended that it Be indefinitely postponed. This com- mittee report was not adopted, but the bill was referred to the commit- tee of the whole. The senate first amended the bill by cutting in half the tax to be levied in eac two “years for. the ’elevator fund, making it one-half a mill each year The Man Respofisible for the Board of Control. Governgr L. B. HANNA constitution authorizing the erection of such a system of elevators in North Dakota and referred this amendment for approval to the 1913 legislature. . Again People Vote The 1913 legislature approved the amendment authorizing the erection of the system within the state and it was submitted to the people in 1914. Again the people adopted the amendment by a vote of four to one. Therefore, as it stood when the 1915 legislature convened, the legislature was authorized by the people, through amendments to the constitution, to erect the system of terminal eleva- tors so overwhelmin%}y demanded either in the state of North Dakota, or in the states of Minnesota and Wis- consin, or both. The people wanted the terminal elevator system. They were willing to leave it to experts and to the legislature where it was best to locate it. As before mentioned the legisla- ture of 1913, which already had the af:proval of the people for terminal elevators in Wisconsin and Minnesota, passed a bill levlvling a’ tax to build the system in those states and in- structing the board of control to - draw the plans and specifications and carry out the preliminary work. This bill was house bill No. 422 in the 1913 session and it had varied ad- ventures before it became law as chapter 279, laws of 1913. House Passes Bill House bill No. 422, as introduced and passed in the house of represen: tatives, provided for a tax of one mill to be levied in 1914 and 1915 for the creation of a terminal elevator construction and maintainance fund. It received a:vote of 67 to 25, 19 absent or not voting, in the house. It then went to the senate and was re- ferred to ‘the committee on appro-: This** amend« instead of one mill. - ment was offered by Senator E. L. . offered another . amendment, - ‘port-on the terminal elevator propo- Garden of Bottineau and was the second jolt the bill received in the senate, the first being the unfavor- able report of the committee. - As thus amended the bill passed the senate by a vote of 32 to 16, two ab- sent or not voting. The house approved the senate amendment by a vote of 85 to 11, 15 absent or not voting. The following day the senate, on motion of Senator Talcott, reconsidered its vote approv- ing the bill as amended, and Talcott which was addpted, further reducing the tax levy for the elevator fund. it now stood the bill provided for a tax of one-eighth of one mill to be levied in 1914, 1915, 1916 and 1917, instead of one mill to be levied in 1914 and 1915, as originally passed by the house. The total tax therefore was made one-half a mill instead of two mills. The bill then passed the senate again, by a vote of 27 to 14, nine ab- sent or not voting. Approves Change ; The house approved the new amend- ments of the senate by a vote of 100 to 10, absent or not voting, one. The bill was now ready for the gov- ernor’s signature, which it received. While the journal of the senate and house makes it appear the amend- ments provided the tax of one-eighth mill per year was to be levied in 1914, 1915, 1916 and 1917, the bill as it ap- pears in, the laws of 1913 and in the state code leaves off the 1917, whether through mistake or not is not known, so the ‘total tax for the elevator system as finally appearing in the laws of the state amounted to three-eights mills; against two- mills originally. and ‘originally The state board of control’s ‘in- subordination to the will of the peo- ple and to the legislature of 1913 was admitted by the beard in'its re- ovided in the bill of the ° opted by the house. - .of control , .. .. to submit . pelt methods and rules of operations ofi A Traitorous Board and a Cowardly Legislature sition. . The board-began its report by stating it was made “in conform- ity with chapter 279 of -the 1913 session laws.” Further along it says: “The bill ' (requiring the board #o report) as passed may not explicitly make it the duty of this board to ascertain or set forth.whatever ad« vantages or disadvantages the gen- . eral proposal for the state to es-. tablisfi and operate terminal eleva- ;,lors i'n Minnesota or Wisconsin may ave.” . Admits Its Guilt At the end of the report the board . says: “In filing this report as provided by law this hoard recognizes that it is possibly furnishing information not asked for under our instructions, . but the proposition of establishing a system of state-owned and operated terminal - elevators, if of sufficient capacity to accommodate the pro« ducts of " the state, would involve an expenditure of such a large sum of - money by the state that we feel the -fullest information should be given and that the conclusions of the board would not be out of place.” . In this language, then, the board admitted it exceeded its instructions and reported on the advisability of a proposition already approved by the people of the state at two elec- tions and by the 1913 legislature. The state, it appears, paid the expenses of the board to Canada and various cities of Minnesota and Wisconsin to dig up every possible argument; against terminal elevators and to in- terview every possible opfonent of state-owned utilities of all kinds iti could find. The report was a brief —an argument—against terminal ele- vators owned by the people and it so ° completely shut out evidence in favor - of such a ‘utility that the legislature ordered the board” to make a sup- plemental ‘' report, giving the inter- views and correspondence it had with people and organizations favorable to the proposition. : Not until the board complied and made this supplemental report were the arguments for a terminal elevator to be had as they were présented to the board. -The story of whera the board went and what _it did, who it interviewed, etc., will furnish data for a future article the Leader is preparing. It is. sufficient for, this, article te examine the report and see if it gave the—1915 legislature what the 1913 legislature ordered prepared. 7 Orders Positive ' The act of the 1913 legislature (chapter 279) stated: “It shall be the duty of the board of control . . ... to submit plans and specifications of buildings and equipment and machinery.” This could: mean nothing but that - the board was to prepare working plans for the construction of a sys- tem of terminal elevators. No such plans and specifications were prepar+ ed by the board or for the board. Instead the hoard. submikied .a_ gen- eral discussion of the cost of eleva- tors and reported as follows: g “At the request of the board, the architects and builders of the Cana« dian terminal elevator at Port Ar- thur, Messrs. Barnett & Record of Min- neapolis, who are highly recommended as_elevator builders, have offered to submit for $100 photographic plans, condensed information and rough es- timate of cost of erecting terminal elevators at the Twin Cities-and head of the lakes. The board has not felt justified in making this expendi- ture, but should the legislature de- sire this- information, it can be se- cured in a week or 10 days. Such detailed set of glans and specifica- tions as would finally be required before beginning construction would consist of some 150 sheets of draw= ings, several hundred pages of speci- - fications, and would cost several thousand dollars.” Board: Side-Steps This is how the board side-step- ped its specifiic instructions. It was ordered by the legislature to secure exactly the kind of working draw- . ings and estimates of cost as the board describes in the above para« graph and which it admits it failed to secure. “Should the legislature desire information,” the board said, - it could be d;;rocured. The board had' positive orders to secure it, but it was interested in killing the elévator iminary steps toward its construc« tion, as had been ordered. i ‘Chapter 279 of the laws of 1913 further provided: : : 4 “It shall be the duty of the board CRR T the same (the terminal elevator ‘gys4 - tem), it being the duty of the ‘board: - roposition, not in taking the pre< “ « BT Lo