| OCR Text |
Show be appointed by Senate President '.law was defeated, j While a house caucus of all members mem-bers shewed a majority apparently j in favor cf state stores without any ; private sales, sentiment in the up-j up-j per branch may not be so strong ; along this line. Powerful elements ' there are said to favor state stores with private sales permitted in cer-i cer-i tain state licensed places such as hotels and restaurants. Is labor, through its legislative representatives, outsmarting the farm bloc supposedly its lawmaking lawmak-ing bedfellow in the daily doings on Capitol hill? Some legislators allied with the agriculturists profess to believe this that the soil toilers thus far have been taken for a legislative ride by irrigation stock redemptions. I The senate has recognized the farmers by enactment of the bill enabling the federal government to buy lands for flood and erosion control. con-trol. Of more importance was its passage of the homestead tax exemption ex-emption act. Neither has it done much that labor wants excepting passage of he child labor resolution, resolu-tion, originating in the upper house. It did pass the underground miners' min-ers' 8-rnur bill, but with an amendment amend-ment which the mine workers declare de-clare destroys the measure's effectiveness. effec-tiveness. The bill in which labor is most vitally interested H. B. 4, providing provid-ing for many major changes in the state workmen's compensation law is receiving much attention, much of it adverse. In fact, so strong were the objections that it has been re- Qfl J k Iiy U. S. P. A. Service To buy or not to buy that Is the question. Anent this query of buying by, thirsty denzincs of Utah will probably prob-ably know by the end of next week whether or not they are to be permitted per-mitted to buy those by-products of corn and rye well known as hard liquor by the drink 'and by the bottle bot-tle or by the bottle only. To keen sizers-up of sentiment fore and aft in house and senate it looks very much as though by by-the-bottle only fellows are holding the whip hand. They proved conclusively conclu-sively last week that as far as the lower house is concerned the question ques-tion of liquor control is no longer one of state stores versus licensed private selling places, but simply one of state stores with no private sales versus state stores with private pri-vate sales by hotels and restaurants only. The sole and remaining hope at least in the house of the private by-the-drink sales exponents now seemingly lies in the retention of a semblance of such sales as a part of a state operated stores measure. That they are forced with a bitter last-ditch fight to obtain even this small leaven is admitted. Hardened proponents of state stores by-the- I bottle sales only are apparently unwilling un-willing to grant the hotel-restaurant sales concession and are claiming victory for state stores with no by-the-drink sales at all. Under House Bill 41 the committee commit-tee of 49 bill reported out favorably last week by the house judiciary committee as amended Saturday, power to name a liquor control commission com-mission of three is vested in the governor. Amendments adopted further fur-ther provide an "anti-snooping" section prohibiting records of state store purchases being made public excepting in court actions; elimination elimi-nation of a section providing that no store shall be established in any county in which 60 per cent of the voters at the last repeal election favored continuance of prohibition eliminated; another making it mandatory man-datory for the commission to determine deter-mine how much of monies allowed shall be invested in various brands of alcoholic beverages, and another given liquor enforcement powers to all peace officers and some state officials. of-ficials. Senatorial as well as house opinion opin-ion seemed to favor quick disposal of the liquor problem. This was shown when a move to place liquor control measures last on a list of bills to be considered for action by an all-powerful sifting committee to wiuir pernaps more politically skilled skill-ed coalitionists. As evidence they point to the record of measures passed upon by house and senate, seeing there more consideration for labor bills than those deemed important im-portant to agriculture. Labor has succeeded with the cooperation of lawmakers from the rurual communities or districts in getting action on several in which its keenest supporters are vitally interested. On the other hand a goodly proportion of the bills in which rural representatives are evincing the greatest interest are yet to come before the house or senate for consideration. Three measures of great concern to labor child labor, underground miners' work-day, and militia controlhave con-trolhave passed the house. Only one of interest to farmers the homestead tax exemption bill, and its benefit to farmers is questionable has won final approval in the lower branch. And the last received practically unanimous support. Many agriculturists however opposed the child labor resolution, but labor delegates held it non-cooalition. The agriculturists have benefitted by some minor balms in passage by the house of such bills as those providing pro-viding for labeling of ingredients in commercial feedstuffs, flood and erosion ero-sion control encouragement, regula-tion regula-tion of commercial fertilizers, and written. The Hall bill, regulating produce i dealers, a measure of great interest to agriculturists, was under floor discussion last week, but remained in status quo due to adjournment. It was unfinished business for Monday. Mon-day. Chicago versus the Intermountain country. This might well be a title-caption for the battle now being waged by western industry against the proposal pro-posal to open the way for a return to the alleged discriminatory "back haul" system of freight charges thru the repeal by the national congress of the transportation aot familiarly known as the long and short haul. The real motivating force behind the railways' effort to repeal the law is said to be a keen desire on the part of Chicago territory industrialists industrial-ists and wholesalers to regain control con-trol of western markets. This they had before the Panama canal was built. Construction of the "big ditch" and consequent steamship freight movements brought the East into competition with Chicago and eventually opened the intermountain intermoun-tain country 'and Pacific coast to the eastern seaboard and Pittsburgh territory markets. Now, say westerners, Chicago wants to destroy this competition. They argue that the railroads base their desirps for rpnpal nrt o loci to at least share in the coast to coast traffic now running through the canal, but that what they really want is destruction of this traffic and to substitute for it a similar line of merchandise from Chicago, hauled haul-ed west by the rails. Intermountain industrialists and merchants, claim that repeal of the law would result virtually in removal remov-al of manufacturing establishments to the seaboard. They point to industrial in-dustrial development here having been made possible by abolishment of the old discriminatory rate structure struc-ture under which the rate included the freight charges from Chicago to the Pacific coast plus the back haul charges to Salt Lake City. Repeal of the law would, they say, make it possible to return to the old system sys-tem of freight charges, thereby increasing in-creasing rates to such an extent as to put them out of business in this section. Utah legislators are being urged to memorialize congress against passage pass-age of- the repeal act. The Utah Citizens Rate association is supporting support-ing the memorial. Some railway brotherhoods are opposing it on the ground that repeal would help the railroads and thus result in increase employment. 8. M. Welsh state legislative representative of the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, is supporting it. According to representatives of operating companies, additional burdens bur-dens would be imposed on consumers, consum-ers, with no compensating benefits to the public, through passage of a long list of public utility measures introduced in the house. The bills, sponsored by Representative Represen-tative Warnick C. Lamoreaux of Salt Lake county, propose many wicugt, hi cxiKiuig- regulation by the public utilities commission of gas, electric and telephone utilities. They enter into practically every detail de-tail of company management, including in-cluding holding companies. Mr. Lamoreaux at a recent public hearing on his bills was unable to explain the intent or purpose of some of the proposed changes in existing regulations. Deputy State Attorney General John C. Rice was called upon up-on to aid in making explanations, but he admitted unfamiliarity with many of the bills. R. R. Garey, public utilities commission com-mission engineer, declared that H. B. 46, pertaining to contracts with affiliates was "illadvised and there is somp Hnnht. qc ty Ho ortTi7t-i.,.; u some aouDt as to its constitutionality." constitution-ality." it was pointed out that H, B. 58, requiring different accounts for merchandising and strictly utility utili-ty business would 'be a direct blow at the rural consumer. The substance of arguments against Lamoreaux measures was that the utilities commission already possessed sufficient power to protect pro-tect the public and that requirements require-ments mandated would add unnecessarily unne-cessarily to costs of operation, which of necessity would be reflected In burdens upon the consumer. Nine of the group of 17 Lamoreaux Lamor-eaux bills have been reported out favorably by the house public utilities util-ities committee. One, H. B. 67, making mak-ing it mandatory for utilities to report re-port rate schedules and unit costs on consumers' monthly statements was passed by the house last week. H. B. 46 is as yet unacted on by committee. |
