My name is Henry Hugh Magill and I am the grandson of the relative you are looking for relatives of. I go by Jay and you are welcome to email me. ~Henry Magill
regarding Okie's story
from Vol. 9 Iss. 18
Linda. I promised to send a picture of the Gray Mitchell Reunion. My pictures were not good. My son thought he knew how to use my camera. DON'T THINK SO. I'm sending some pictures my cousin took. He sent them to me for identification. The first picture is of the George Gray siblings (my fa [more]... ~Reta Jackson
regarding Okie's story
from Vol. 7 Iss. 33
Have you ever heard of the term "Swat the Knockers?" This is what we found in The Wichita Beacon, dated 15 April 1909, Thursday, page 7: "Swat the Knocker." The Knocker wasn't numerous but he was awfully busy in Wichita. The Knocker didn't appreciate what local magnates had done for Wichita by getting it advanced to a higher league.
This was the season of the year when the cheap knocker was abroad in the land. He was no more numerous in Wichita than elsewhere, in fact, he was very much outnumbered here, but he pokes his head up every once in a while for all that, and he generally made himself felt unless someone got angry and stepped on him.
The knocker was a man who liked people to think that he knew more about the great national game than anyone else. Of course, he only had to talk for a few minutes until everyone got next to the fact that he never had won any major league pennants, but he didn't know that and hence he kept on talking.
Occasionally, though, one would run across a knocker who was a little bit smoother than the general run of the fraternity. He may be a man who was a pretty good fellow other ways, and for that reason his words may carry more weight than most knocker's remarks do. Wichita had that kind, too. In fact, she had a small representation of each brand and color. Like the poor, they were always with us.
The knocker was always a great fan. He posed as a friend of the game, and only wishes that the home team was made up of better exponents of it. He could tell you a hundred different places where he could make a winner out of it, and a real baseball man can tell him in just about a minute how little he really could do. But the baseball man usually kept his mouth shut and let the knocker howl himself hoarse. Maybe it's the wrong course for the baseball man to pursue, as far as suppressing a nuisance was concerned, but it saved a lot of trouble for the moment. It was easier sometimes to walk away and let a knocker spout, than to take issue with him.
These remarks apply generally to every city that had baseball and, incidentally, to every city that had anything else worth while. The genus hit-'em-a-dab is found in every town, and it was almost as numerous in mid-season as it was in the gents spring time. Even a pennant winner never played quite as good a game as the knocker would had it play.
What few knockers Wichita had were pretty busy just now. They were working overtime, trying to convince people that Jack Holland didn't understand his business, and the Wichita was doomed to trail along so far behind in the Western league race, that the Enid team in the Western association last season would look like a pennant winner by comparison. They shake their heads sagely, and wring their hands mournfully, while they tell how sorry they are that Wichita hadn't a better team. They compare Roberts with Frank Chance, Hughes with Lajoie, Anderson with Hans Wagner, Richter and Westerzel with Bradley and Devlin or Morality and Tannehill, and insist that Pennell, Pettigrew, Middleton and Cole are not as good as Ty Cobb, Donlin, Fred Clarke and big Sam Crawford. They content that the team would be better with Addie Joss, Doc White, Cy Young, Mordical Brown, Orvie Overall and Wild Bill Donovan pitching for it, than it was with Clark, Shaner, Brenan, Bailey, Westcott, Swaim and Andrews working on the slab. They even go so far as to express a preference for John Kling and Billy Sullivan over Art Queisser, though most of them fall in line and consider "Buck" Weaver a fit candidate for a place on their team.
As to Holland - well, the fact that they were doing the talking shows who they would put in his place. Each one of them was just a little bit too modest to suggest the name of him who cold manage a team just right.
Every man had the right to his own opinion - knockers as well as others. It's the everlasting expression of it that grates on the ears of the real fan, and that was what makes a knocker.
Wichita would go into the Western league race two weeks from that day with a team that was made up of men who were comparatively unknown. There wasn't a star in the bunch. There wasn't a star in the bunch, and there wasn't a man in the lot who had started back towards the scrap pile. Everyone was a hustler, and everyone was out to win. It would suit Manager Holland unless someone falls down who looks good now.
It would be such a team only much better of course, as that which won the pennant for Wichita in 1905. That one was doped, even by President Shively himself, to draw the booby prize in the Western association that season. It fooled all of the critics, though.The Topeka experts, with a whole year's experience in the same company, saw it work early in the season.
The Wichita team won the series, but it didn't show the class to hold the pace. It may not have had class, but it won the pennant.
Most of the real fans in Wichita feel that they were justified in having faith in both Jack Holland and Frank Isbell. Two pennant winners out of four, a close third and a closer second for the other two teams, was a pretty good record for Manager Holland, and when he says that he would land in the first division, most of the fans believe he would. They were not worrying about how he was going to get there. They were relying upon his judgment, because he had shown them that he had it and knew how to use it.
Holland and Isbell had been doing things for Wichita since they go hold of the team franchise. Not only did they take a team that was riddled by the higher leagues that last season and put it within less than twenty points of the top, but they were the chief actors in the little game of baseball politics which put Wichita and Topeka in the Western league. They spent their own me=oney and used their own time to work it, and they deserve something better than even the few knocks which have been thrown at them that spring.
Whether he lands in the first division or not, and the real fans were confident that he would, Jack Holland ought to be given credit for what he had done to give Wichita some prominence in baseball. The poorest way to thank him for what he had done, was to tell everyone that he was bound to fall down that year, and that he was not equal to the task of picking a Western league winner. The best way to show appreciation was to get behind him and boost. He didn't ask it, but he was like most other men, and would appreciate the show of a little assurance that the Wichita fans had faith in him, rather than a skeptical shake of a hollow head every time the chance for the Wichita team was discussed.
NW Okie's grandpa, Wm. J. "Bill" McGill, played professional baseball in the early 1900's. Doing research in old newspaper archives, we found this mention in The Wichita Beacon, dated 15 April 1909, Thursday, page 7: "Are Practicing Team Work Today," as Manager Holland was giving regulars their first instructions. "Dad McGill had signed a Wichita contract - Richter and Bailey go to Enid - both were thought to make good there.
Manager Holland started out on a new line of work with his baseball squad that morning (4/15/1909). He took up team practice and inside baseball, and would drill his regulars in that style of play from then on until the opening of the season two weeks hence.
Holland had been waiting for his pitchers to get into condition before he commenced this work, but the persistency with which the cold weather was hanging on, had prompted him to go ahead with it anyway. He realized that the twirlers were working under a handicap in trying to get their arms in shape in such temperature as that which had prevailed that spring, and did not expect them to show what they could do until it got considerably warmer than it had been to date.
As a student of the inside points of the game, Wichita's manager had few superiors in minor league baseball. It was because his teams played the game that they had won in the past, and it was the inside ball that had given Wichita teams, which were made up of players of only ordinary ability, credit for being the luckiest organizations in the circuit. It was usually a case of outgeneraling the opposition.
Holland believed that his team was now about as it would start the season. There possibly would be some additions to the pitching staff, and it was not known which of the four outfielders would start the championship race on the bench. It would depend chiefly upon which three were in the best condition.
McGill Now a Jobber
"Dad" McGill joined the local squad that morning. McGill was the big pitcher who formerly played with and was a student at Friends University. Since then he had played with the Austin, Texas, league team, the St. Louis Nationals and the Enid Western Association team. He pitched for a couple of weeks for Wichita in 1905, but was too young at the game then to show class. It was believed that he had some good pitching in his right arm, and he is confident that he can win tor the Hollanders. He had been trying for two weeks to land a job here, and finally succeeded in getting his release so he could become a member of the Jobber staff.
"Dutch" Richter and "Bill" Bailey go Enid as a result of the McGill and Westerzill acquisition. Both ought to make good in the Western association, for both are above the average for that class. Holland would keep his eye on both of them, and would be ready to put in a draft for both, should they develop into as good men as they not give promise of being. Enid was weak at third and Richter would fill a big hole there.
This article from The Times Dispatch, out of Richmond, Virginia, dated 21 January 1909, Thursday, page 6, tells the story of the Earl of Warwick, who claimed descent from the Kingmaker. It was written by La Marquise de Fontenoy, "The Courts of Europe."
Lord Warwick's boast on the subject of his lineage in the interview which he granted to Mrs. George Augustus Sala, and which, printed in a number of American papers, commences, "Yes, I am descended from the Kingmaker, Earl of Warwick." This would be news to most students of history and genealogy, for there were no ties of blood between the house of Greville, of which the present Lord Warwick was the chief, and the Kingmaker portrayed by Bulwer Lytton as "The last of the barons" in the novel of that name, and the only association between them was that of title and of the ownership of Warwick Castle.
It appears that the Kingmaker had no son, but two daughters, one of whom, Lady Anne Neville, after marrying Edward, Prince of Wales, the murdered son of Henry VI, became the consort of Richard III, of England. The other daughter, Lady Isabel, married the Duke of Clarence, who was drowned in a butt of Malmsey wine. By this marriage there were two children, a son and a daughter. The son inherited through his mother his grandfather's earldom of Warwick, and died without issue, a parliamentary attender of his earldom of Warwick following his death, and being, therefore, of a posthumous character. The daughter, Margaret, Countess of Salisbury, who was beheaded in the Tower, had a daughter and four sons, one of whom was Cardinal Pole, Archbishop of Canterbury. As the eldest brother of cArdinal Pole left a number of daughters, ti might have been possible that, through some matrimonial alliance of their descendants with he house of Greville, the present Earl of Warwick could have boasted of descent, ever so indirect, of the Kingmaker. But, had the present Earl of Warwick, or any of the other four Earls of Warwick of the house of Greville, been able to discover a descent of this kind, we should undoubtedly have heard of it long ere this, and they would have taken the customary steps to secure a repeal of the attainder, all the more as the Kingmaker earldom of Warwick was a peerage descendable through the female as well as the male side of the house.
Unfortunately for Lord Warwick, his own wife had in her book, entitled "Warwick cAstle and its Earls," demonstrated the fallacy of his pretensions to be a descendant of the Kingmaker, for the volume in question showed, among other things, how it was that her husband had no connection whatsoever, directly or indirectly, with the peer known as "the last of the barons." The book was well worthy of study, for, leaving aside the many legends which are connected with Warwick Castle, it proved the historic pile, which was the bourne of so many American pilgrimages, to have been built by the daughter of Alfred the Great, and to have belonged in turn to the houses of Newburgh, of Beauchamp, of Neville, of Dudley and of Greville; the house of Rich, which for 140 years enjoyed the possession of the earldom of Warwick, having never owned Warwick Castle.
Warwick Castle belonged to the Dudleys when it was visited by Queen Elizabeth, and among its most frequent guests was Amy Robert, wife of Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, and the heroine of Sir Walter Scott's novel of "Kenilworth." The Dudley Earl of Warwick played a considerable role in the opening up of this country. It was he who furnished Sir Martin Frobisher with the means of making all those discoveries in the northern part of this hemisphere which are commemorated, among other things, by what was then Frobisher's Bay, and by the so-called Countess of Warwick Island, north of Hudson Straits. This Lord and Lady Warwick may be said to have ruined themselves in efforts to explore, develop and colonize this country, and among their fellow-sufferers were Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, and Queen Elizabeth herself.
It was another of Queen Elizabeth's favorites - namely, Fulke Greville - who obtained from her successor, King James I, a grant of the then half ruined Warwick Castle and dependencies, being raised tot he peerage as Lord Brooke. Stabbed and killed when already on his deathbed by a servant who was angered at finding that he had not been remembered in his master's will, the barony of Brooke and Warwick Castle, with all the other estates, passed, according to a special remainder of the peerage, to his cousin, Robert Greville, as second Lord Brooke, the eighth Lord Brooke and eighth of the Greville owners of Warwick Castle being raised first to the earldom of Brooke, and fifteen years later to the earldom of Warwick, on the death without issue of the last of the Earls of Warwick of the house of Rich. This was in 1758, and the present Lord Warwick (1909) was only the fifth earl of this creation.
The house of Rich may be said to have been founded by that rascally lord chancellor who gave evidence against Sir Thomas More, and who took a personal part in the torture of Anne Askew, among its most notable members having been Penelope Rich, who was the "stella" of Sir Philip Sydney, and Charlotte, Countess of Warwick, who married Addison. The house of Greville itself was founded by a merchant of London of the name of William Greville, who loaned money to Richard II.
Lady Robert Montage, whose death was announced from London, was a grand-aunt of the present (1909) Duke of Manchester, having been the widow of Lord Robert Montagu, a younger brother of the seventh duke. She was Lord Robert's second wife, and was of very humble origin, having, indeed, been a domestic servant up to the time when Lord Robert led her to the altar. She was employed as a housemaid at the house next to that of Lord Robert and, watching her out of the windows of his study while she was scrubbing the house doorsteps of morning, he fell in love with her, and by wedding her transformed her into a sister-in-law of the then Duchess of Manchester and present (1909) and actual widowed Duchess of Devonshire. He had several children by her, who have experienced some difficulty in making both ends meet; for, although his first wife was an heiress, he only retained a life interest in her property, which went at his death to the son she had borne him - namely, Robert Montagu.
The latter's wife, a Miss Annie McMicking, also a great heiress, and owner of Miltonese, one of the first places in Scotland, was convicted in 1892 of having brought about the death of her three-year-old daughter, Mary, by chocking cruelty, and was sentenced to a couple of years' imprisonment for homicide. Robert Montagu, who thus enjoys through his n=mother and through his wife an income of over $100,000 a year and the possession of large estates in Scotland and Ireland, is third in the direct line of succession to the dukedom of Manchester - the first being the present duke's little boy, and the second the late duke's only brother, Lord Charles Montagu, a confirmed bachelor, who had not the slightest idea of marrying, and who inherited a handsome bequest from his stepfather, the late Duke of Devonshire. He made his home with his mother, the widowed Duchess of Devonshire, and was a warm friend of the Late Duke of Clarence.
The late Lord Robert Montagu was a most unpopular man, who died estranged from most of the members of his family, and with relatively few to regret him, for he was as inconstant in his friendships as he was in his political and religious beliefs, having changed backwards and towards between the Church of England and the Church of Rome so many times that it was difficulty to recall then in which of the two he died.
View/Write Comments (count 0)
updates (0 subscribers) |
1895, Big Bank Robbery Haul
There was a strange, weird bank robbery that occurred in 1895, November 22nd, at the Santa Fe Depot, in Colorado Springs, Colorado. This story was found in the Highland Recorder, out of Monterey, Virginia, dated 22 November 1895, Friday, page 1: "A Big Haul Robbers Get Twenty Thousand Dollars Easily. Put the Agent To Bed."
The agent was confronted by Robbers with pistols and made to open a safe and hand out the money, but some money money was saved. Thieves not excited, though. Why only the $20,000 and not the other $35,000 left in the safe?
This story comes as a special tot he news from Colorado Springs, Colorado, who said, "The express office at the Santa Fe Depot in Colorado Springs was robbed. Immediately after the departure of the night express at 9:42pm George Krout, the express agent, stepped from the platform into his office and was confronted by two masked men, who leveled revolvers at his head and ordered him to open the safe. This he did and they helped themselves to two packages of money containing $5,000 and $15,000 sent from Denver to Cripple Creek, the remainder of which as in the safe, but was not found. Officers were scouring the country in the hope of capturing the robbers.
The Wells Fargo Express Company had given out the following official statement regarding the robbers. $20,000 was sent from Denver to the First National Bank of Colorado Springs early in the afternoon.
The money was in currency of small denominations' nd was received about 4 o'clock, and too late to be delivered tot he bank. The package containing the money was placed in the depot safe, and both doors locked.
There was nothing to indicate its value. Evidently the thieves knew of its existence. When train No. 6 came in, about 9:43, there were the packages aboard with the currency, to the amount of $35,000, consigned to the same bank. These packages were delivered tot he agent and placed in the safe with the other.
After the train had departed, the agent, George Krout, went to the platform to straighten the trucks, which were standing there, and when he returned to the office he was met at the door by two masked men with drawn revolvers. The package containing the $20,000 was demanded, and the agent was compelled to open the safe and give it up. The agent said nothing about the remaining packages, and the robbers left at once. The standing rewards of $300 each for information or arrest of the robbers, of course, holds good, and the amount would undoubtedly be increased.
When Krout entered his office, after performing his duties outside, two men, on tall, the other short, confronted him with revolvers pointed at his head and commanded him to throw up his hands.
Krout, badly frightened, obeyed. Then on of the robbers, stepping close to the agent said, "Not a word from you. We want you to pen that safer and be quick about it. Hurry up."
Krout denied that there was any money in the safe. The revolver was pressed close to him, and he was told to open the safe, or suffer the consequences.
With trembling hands he slowly turned the combination. When the door swung open Krout explained that there was only one package there, and reaching in he picked up an envelope containing $20,000, which he handed to the short man. He then closed the heavy door.
The robbers, seeming satisfied that the agent told the truth, stepped away from the safe. Krout's action in handing out the $20,000 package and closing the doors of the safe saved the company $35,000.
During all this time the thieves did not appear in the least excited.
The robbers ordered Krout to undress himself and get into his bed. After he had done so, one of the robbers took pains to see that the quilts and comforters were drawn tightly over Krout's had and tucked down. Then Krout heard one of them say, "Now, open the door and see if there is anyone about."
Krout heard the door slide back and bump, and then one of the robber's said, "Wait now, we have missed something. Let us take a good long look over the place and see."
When Krout picked up courage to jump out of bed and go outside, there was no one in sight. An alarm was given, and by 11 o'clock posses was scouring the vicinity of the depot on the eastern outskirts of the town, but no trace of the robbers was found. Finally, two bloodhounds were put not he trail, and it was found that the men had gone along Pike's Peak Avenue through he heart of the city. On the theory that they would go to Cripple Creek, over the Cheyenne Mountain road, a posse started from the city to head them off. The depot agent was not 100 yards away from Krout's office while the robbery was being committed, but he did not see the robbers, and knew nothing about the matter until informed by Krout.
The express company's officials believe that the robbery was committed by A. J. Gray, alias Sam Wells, and J. G. Stuart, alias C. J. Starr, who was arrested for the theft of $16,000 from the express wagon at Cripple Creek April 11 (1895), and who recently in company with Tom McCarthy, escaped from jail in Denver.
1964, McGill Signals Fresh Leadership Battle in State Democratic Party
Remember back to 1964 when "right to work" was the heat of campaigns in Oklahoma Politics? My dad, Gene McGill, was wanting the Democratic party to remain neutral on the controversial Issue of "right to work." The executive committee of Democratic Party overrode McGill's objections and voted 8-7 to place the party on record opposing right to work legislation.
In The Lawton Constitution, Lawton, Oklahoma, dated 20 January 1964, Monday, page 17, the headlines read: "McGill Signals Fresh Leadership Battle In State Democratic Party," written by Gaylord Shaw.
OKC (AP) -- Gene McGill, outgoing state Democratic chairman, said he plans to take an active role in election of his successor.
McGill's statement could signal a fresh fight for party control - perhaps similar to battles which erupted in 1960 and 1962 when he survived attempts to oust him.
The chairman also squared off against a majority of the party's Executive committee in a hassle for control of the party's biennial reorganization procedure.
The committee jolted McGill Sunday by creating a "committee on committees" which would have virtual control of the vital state central committee meeting in late March.
Contacted for comment not he committee's action, McGill told a newsman he never promised to remain neutral int he race for chairman.
McGill said that when he announced he would not seek re-election, "I said I would not try to dictate who my successor would be and I don't intend to. I'm certainly not going to stand here and let something like this happen." McGill was referring to the committee's action. McGill said, "I said I would remain active in party affairs. I certainly plan to."
McGill said he would not oppose any candidate seeking the post he has held during four stormy years. But he added, "I will be for someone."
He did not mention any names, but sources say McGill is almost certain to work against one avowed candidate, Smith Hester of Purcell. Hester is an Executive Committee member and a bitter critic of McGill.
McGill indicated he plans to brush aside the Executive Committee's action in forming the new panel. Executive Committee members will be up for re-election about two weeks before the central committee meeting, and McGill apparently believes some members will not be re-elected.
"It's been the practice int eh past for the chairman to appoint committees for the slate central committee meeting, " McGill said.
"I plan to make appointments to these committees after consulting with new Executive Committee members."
The resolution forming the "committee on committees" was adopted despite McGill's objections at a Sunday afternoon Executive Committee meeting.
The new panel would make arrangements for and set the date of the central committee meeting which must be held before March 31. State party officers, including chairman, will be elected at that meeting.
The Executive Committee also adopted a resolution forming a committee to audit state party financial records. McGill did not object to this resolution, saying a private auditor is now completing such a check.
McGill, a wealthy Alva rancher, has been at odds with several Executive Committee members for several months. Late last year, the committee called itself into special session and stripped McGill of a majority of appointments to the key platform committee.
A month later, the group overrode McGill's objections and voted 8-7 to place the party on record opposing right-to-work legislation. McGill wanted the party to remain neutral on the controversial issue.
Nine of the 15 Executive Committee were named to the "committee on committees." S. M. (Buddy) Wilcoxson of Shawnee was chairman. Other members were Paul Kenner, Sayre; Mrs. Warren Shear, Duncan; Mrs. Lucille Lawter, Oklahoma City; Mrs. Marguerite Stephenson, Seminole; J. C. Cobb, aRdmore; Ronald Ford, Helena; Mrs. Janice Lang, Hunter; and Mrs. Grace Hudling, Hubbert.
Oklahoma City (UPI) -- Reapportionment forces rejoiced that a three judge federal court had upheld its July, 1963, order districting the Oklahoma Legislature on population.
The court refused to stay its July order. If it had done so, it would have permitted a state supreme court plan to take effect. The latter places more emphasis on area.
Mrs. Trimble Latting of Oklahoma City, legislative chairman of the Oklahoma Congress of Parents and Teachers, said, "I am pleased. Certainly not giving a stay is fine because the federal district court order gives Oklahoma fair and equitable representation, and none of these others do."
Another reapportionment booster, attorney Norman Reynolds, said, "We are, of course, pleased. There is only one remaining hurdle before we have finally obtained the goal of fair and equitable representation in Oklahoma for the next two years."
"We anticipate that they (opponents) will go to the U. S. Supreme Court for a stay," Reynolds said, "We are notifying the state senators, Atty-Gen. Charles Nesbitt and the rest of the opposition and the clerk of the U. S. Supreme Court that we desire to be heard if such an application is presented."
Jim Rinehart, El Reno attorney representing 22 state senators, said he hoped to file an application with the U. S. Supreme Court this week asking a stay of the three-judge court's order.
Nesbitt and Frank Carter of Enid, attorney for the Oklahoma Farm Bureau, also said they would file motions for stays.
1963, What is the Basic Difference Between Two Parties in Oklahoma?
Let us look back to 1963, July 7, Sunday, page 3 of The lawton Constitution., out of Lawton, Oklahoma, with the following page 3 headlines: "Democratic, Republican Party Chiefs Debate Upcoming Presidential, Senate Contests," with this article written by Gaylord and Bob Shaw.
Editor's note - Republicans and Democrats held different views on what's needed for Oklahoma and which party was best suited to provide it. The AP reporters interviewed the state chairman of each party to present these views before the state and national elections for the next 1964 election year.
The Democratic and Republican party leaders in Oklahoma were busy mapping strategy for three key campaigns: president, U. S. Senate and governor (three years away).
It was predicted that all three races would be heated, perhaps the hottest in state history back in the early 1960's.
Republicans would be trying to follow the election last year of Henry Bellmon as the state's first GOP governor by sending a republican to Washington to fill the unexpired term of the late Democratic U. S. Sen. Robert S. Kerr.
The GOP would also be aiming at more republican domination in presidential elections. The GOP presidential nominee had carried the state in the past three elections.
Meanwhile the Democrats were preparing an all out fight to put the state back in the Democratic column in both the presidential and the gubernatorial elections.
-What was the basic difference between the two parties in Oklahoma in 1963?
Gene McGill, Democratic State Chairman said, "Democrats put the people first. Republicans put money and business first."
The Republican counterpart, State GOP Chairman Bill Burkett, said, "The Republican party feels an appropriation first should be necessary, then its desirability should be considered. The Democrats think first of desirability, then of necessity."
-What is the political feeling of the average Oklahoma in 1963?
Burkett replied, "I really think Oklahomans are basically conservative. They certainly aren't conservative to an extreme - thank goodness."
McGill replied, "Basically, everyone is at the same time both a conservative and a liberal. Oklahomans want a dollar's worth of value for a dollar spent and they're entitled to it. They're willing to invest their money to build a good economy for themselves and the state of Oklahoma."
-Do you think the compromises between the governor and the legislature during the past session were good for the state in eneral?
McGill replied, "Government in a democracy is always a compromise, and government is always a result of compromise. Last session the ideas proposed by Bellmon were not sound and the people didn't support them. Most of the compromises were made by the governor. The legislature passed a good program."
Burkett said, " Yes, and absolutely necessary. you can't legislate without compromise. But that would be lovely. Legislation should reflect the viewpoints of the legislatures - and with 120 viewpoints in the House and 44 viewpoints in the Senate, how can you pass anything without a compromise?"
View/Write Comments (count 0)
updates (0 subscribers) |