The anti-monopolist. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1874-1878, 1877-05-24
ANOTHER LETTER FROM HON,
EBENEZER iIRE.S on
THE BOND CUES
T'T1N
COTTAGE GROVE. Nav l6, 1S7

| TIDN.
COTTAGE GROVE. MAY is. 1877.
| Editor .inti-MonopoliM
In my last communication. / prom
| ised in my next. TO speak of the 5OO.-
600 acres of Internal Improvement
| Lands These became the property
OF the State, BY virtue Of an act of
Congress passed in lS4l, and before
Minnesota had an existence, even as a
Territory. They were not specially
designated for onr State. but such an
amount OF acres was. by a general act,
appropriated TO all new States. to aid
the early settlers to open up wagon
roads. build bridges, or perchance
construct canals and railroads. The
right to these lands, was not thought
of by any individual in Minnesota till
| long after the Loan Amendment had
been devised failed-condemne and
almost forgotten, nor until rail roads
had been built and the cars running
thereon in various parts of the State
AS soon as it became generally
known that such general grant Of
lands existed. and that Minnesota's
claim thereto, was recognized, the
greedy cupidity Of the bondspeculators
was excited, and they at once set TO
work to appropriate them TO them.
| selves. There was pretty even race
| between the old hOndholders and q
newly developed batch of railroad
schemes, and sometimes one party
won IL Legislature, and some
times the other. tillat length
a
islatnre arose. and placed the bonds.
as it supposed, beyond the reach of
speculative robbery. Now. these lands
were not given to new States to gam
BILE With--nor to pay old debts either
honest or dishonest, but to promote
such internal Improvements as an
impoverished people in newly set
tied country mostly stood in need of,
such as wagon roads bridges ETC.,
for the quiet and Immediate benefit
of all the people. Tt is as much per-
version of the intention of the general
government, for us TO use. tie avails
of these lands to pay the llocus pocus
/ claims of the bOndholders, as it would
| be for the wife 5 father to give his
daughter means to buy sewing ma
chine and the worthless spendthrifto of
a husband should seize upon them to
pay and old illegal, uncollectable.
gambling debt, for which neither he
nor his family had ever received an
| equivalent or any consideration what
ever. As member Of the Legisla-
ture of 1872 it was my privilege to
frame the Amendment to Article
-Four Of the Constitution, in relation
| TO the Internal Improvement Lands.
1t was my design and of those who
c0-operated with me- to place these
bonds, ut once, in market, and to put
their avails beyond the reach Of
| thieving avarice. 50 1t was provided
that said ''avails should not be appro.
priated for any purpose whatever,
until the act for that purpose should
be approved Of by majority vote Of
I the people. given at a general and
not u special election The I4egisla.
ttue was almost unanimous in its vote
on the passage Of theact. The Amend
mer1t Was presented plainly to the
people-not obscurely by saying, An
Amendment to Article Four Of the
Constitution-but ..An Amendment
to Article Four in relation to keeping
the Internal Improvement Lands or
the proceeds thereof In the hands Of
the people This language was un-
dersto0d by all, and was satisfied by a
majority glnprecedented-thi five
or forty thousand for and about two
thousand against it-showing how
anxious the people were Of taking the
lands0r theprOceeds thereof. from be-
yond the reach of hasty or corrupt
Legislation. Why could not the last
Legislature have been as frank and
explicit and said: To abrOgate
Section 80, Article of the Consti-
tuition providing for taking the
Internal Improvement. or the pro.
ceeds thereof out Of the hands Of the
peoplef' Ii is aggravating to the pa
triotic mind to see the manner in
which amendments to the Fundamental
laws of the State are presented. How
often have I seen men supposed to be
better informed than the community
at large called upon ut the polls. to
explain To the multitude the meaning
and purpose of proposed amendments
to Article this or that Of the Consti.
tuition. Other propositions are entirsla
neglected. Or voted for nnuittingly
If a proposition were submitted.
without explanation to abrogate the
entire Constitution, it would he voted
for bv many. What is the object al
lsuch justification I can see but
one. and that Is to deceire a confdinc
people
| While upon the subject of internal