The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, March 16, 1916, Page 12

Paid Advertisement THE NONPARTISAN LEADER Shall New Rockford Be Denied A Fair Jury Trial? READ and REFLECT---Then Sign the Petition FRANTIC APPEAL NOT TO SIGN PETITIONS In a lengthy editorial, the Bismarck Tribune says among other things: : A g “The Tribune merely desires to inform the voters of the state that.if the New Rockford petitions are not signed by sufficient numbers, the proposition cannot be placed on the ballot.: The contention of New Rockford is without meni,:; Why let it go to a vote at all? Now is the time to nip New Rockford’s venture in the bud. Just don f: sign petitions. If the New Rockford movement “is without merit” then why should Bismarck make such a frantic and desperate effort to “nip New Rockford’s venture in the bud”? Bismarck doesn’t intend to:trust to the intelligence of the North Dakota farmer and voter—O, NO!—*“Nip it in the bud.” That’s what Bismarck calls “fair play.” ,?lsmargk.“gl'ves away her whole case when she appeals to “gag rule” instead of argument. It’s a cinch that Bismarck’s case is “with- out merit.” 3 Sl : i ; CONGRESSMAN- -HELGESON APPROVES Read the following letter from Hon. H. T. Helgeson, Congressman from the first district: “Mr. Frank E. Black, Secretary, Capital Removal Association, New Rockford, N. D. 2 i “My Dear Mr. Black :—Replying to your recent letter relative to. your campaign to remove the Sta'vte Capltal from Bismarck to New Rockford, will say that I can see no reason why the people should not be allowed to decide this question for themselves. “Whenever there is to be a vast amount of money spént in any permanent project within the state, I have always contended that it is only fair and just that the people be allowed to determine for themselves how and where it is to‘be spent. “When the next .Capitol Building is erected in North Dakota it will of course, for all time, settle the location of the Capital of the State, and in a matter of so much importance as this is, I think it is entirely proper that the question should be submitted to the people for their decision. From_The. Nonpartisan Leader, Dec. 30, 1915: CAPITAL REMOVAL CONTEST “Very sincerely yours, ry(Sig'ned:) H. T. HELGESON.” In this issue of the Leader the Capital Removal Association of New Rockford, N. D., oecupy two pages of advertis- ing space in presenting the arguments of that association for the removal of the capital from Bismarck to their home town. TFrom week to week the association will run advertisements presenting further arguments and fgcts, along the: same line. The Leader has nothing to say at this time concerhing the merits of this attempt to remoye the capital of the state to New Rockford, but we are favorable to the principle of allowing the people to vote on any important or fundamental political question. Our readers should inform themselves on the ballot this fall. on this subject, as it will undoubtedly be one of the qqestions Signing of petitions to submit this question is not declaring how one stands on the question, but is merely saying the signers favor the opportunity of the people to vote on it. argued is to submit the question to the people. The best way to get the merits of a case presented and When petitions are signed they should be sent to the Capital Removal Association, New Rockford, N.D. THREE PROPOSITIONS THE VOTERS MUST FACE Proposition 1: A New State Capitol Must Be Built. In 1918 the necessity for a new capitol building be- came so apparent that a special committee was named by the legislative assembly to investigate matters and report their findings. Here is a summary of their report, taken from the House Journal of 1913, Pages 525 to 531. Refer to it for confirmation. “In our opinion to attempt to repair the capitol build- ing except as to adequate fire protection would be neither economical or practical. We therefore recommend to the legislature now in session that immediate steps be taken looking toward the construction of a new capitol building suitable to the needs and keeping with the dignity of this state.” Attached to the committee’s report was the éxpert report of Architect A. J. O’Shea, which, in part was as follows: (See Pages 528 to 531, House Journal of 1913). REPORT OF ARCHITECT A. J. O’'SHEA “The building generally, while in no immediate dang- er of collapse, shows serious indications of disintegrations and judging by the rapidity with which the faults have developed, will be untenable in five years from now, unless practically reconstructed, which would cost almost as much as a new building and result would be at best an undesirable structure.” Proposition 2: No Additional Taxés; Proof: Capitol Fund, $1,199,216.37. At the opening of the session in 1915, the condition of the capitol building was such as to demand the immed- iate attention of the legislators, and on the Twenty-Ninth Day Representative Williams, of Burleigh county (in which county Bismarck is located,) introduced the follow- 111‘3g1“ 51)'esolution (See Pages 357-858, House Journal for “Be it Resolved by the House of Representatives that the Governor Be and he is hereby requested to communi- cate to the House at his earliest convenience, a complete = report as to what has been done with the eighty-two: (82) - thousand acres of land granted the state for the purpose . ° of erecting public buildings at the capital under the pro- visions of Sections 12 and 17 of the Act of Congress, ap- proved February 22, 1889, known as the Enabling Act.” ¥ ok %k ook k% The- following is copied from the House Journal of North Dakqta for 1915, Pages 372-373: ST SR MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR [0k The following message was received from the Governor: g ‘ : Office of the Governor, Bismarck, North Dakota, Feb- ruary 3, 1915, L. B. Hanna, Governor. To the House of Representatives, Bismarck: ! : 4 Gentlemen: I have before me your resolution asking for in- formation as to 1}',1he Capitol Building Lands, and I hand you a te: t herewith. st X;:ext},he (teime North Dakota was admitted as a state, the state was granted 82,000 acres for Capitol Buildings. Burleigh county also donated 160 acres, making a total of 82,160 acres. CAPITOL LAND GRANT. Government Grant, acres 82,000 Donation Burleigh County 160 82,160 51,528.01 ©80,631:99 Total purchase price for land sold $647,443.31 Outstanding on land contracts at 6 per cent 856,675.29 Invested in bonds from permanent fund . 108,250.00 at 4 per cent Invested in bonds from interest and income fund at 4 per cent 100,000.00 Cash on hand January 1st, permanent fund 18,608.76 Cash on hand January 1st, interest and income fund 46,289.74 otal, 5 ; Acres sold on right of way and patents Acres remaining unsold. . $629,823.79 The lands, 30,631.99 acres unsold average well and are well located and should bring from $12.00 to $25.00 per acre or an average of about $17.00 per acre, at which price they would net the Capitol Building Fund : Some of the Capitol Building Funds have been used for purposes not authorized under the Enabling Act, giving the State the lands for buildings at the State Capital: 5 $520,743.83 _Among. the items are the trolley line, about $20,000.00 Well and : tower. Furniture X Purchase of lots 4,973.75 The state from its General Fund should and must return this money. Total to the credit of the Capitol Building Fund $1,199,21637 - . There are no Capitol Building Bonds now outstanding. Al of those issued to pay for the tglresent building have been retired, the last $50,000.00 of them within the past two years. e :The earnings from leases on unsold lands and interest on: - land contracts’ and bonds will amount to at least $32,000.00 per . & year. : : B SRS o> . If there is any further information which the legislature may- wish to haye I shall be glad to furnish it or have it furnished at aat any time, T haye the honor to be, 3 25 S ; Very respectfully, L. B. HANNA, Governor. $48,648.76