Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-11-04
FOURTH DISTRICT.

To the Editor of the Globe:
Capt. Henry A. Castle, who is strongly
advocating Washburn's election, ought to
be good witness. What does he say?
There was just recently published by the
chamber of commerce committee on the
Mississippi river, report giving the rea-
sons why the saw dust bill recommended
by the chief engineer of the war depart
ment, could not pass In that report Capt
Castle is quoted as saying
that when he went to Wash
ington to lobby for this bill as the repre-
sentative of our business union, he found
M.ssrs. Dunnell and Poehler the only rep
resentatives of Minnesota who were heart
lily in favor of it, while Window was &C.
lively against it. Washburn unwilling to
do anything for it because it effected the
s'pecuniary interests of many of his con-
stituents, and Mcmillan. in NOV you
see me and now you don't see me" sort of
condition, with one eye on his friends in st.
Paul, the other on those in Minneapolis he
wanted to be his friends and the bill in his
pocket as the sub committee of the COM
1u0TC6 CO1LlullL00 VI Lu0 ScudG0s
Capt. Castle goes on to say that sail the
documentary evidence from the engineer
department of the army strongly sustained
the bill" It had been recommended by the
Mississippi river committee, the Quincy
river convention, the st. Paul chamber of
neers in charge of the Mississippi river
improvements and all steamboat men in
this country and Canada. But the ''pecu
iary interests" of many of Mr.. Washburn's
constituents were too much for the bill and
all these powerful influences were set aside
and overcome by him and his friend Win
dom, who made Mcmillan do their bidding
under penalty of losing the Minneapolis
influence for United States senator. And
who were these Constituents" whose s'pe-
cuniary interests" outweighed all the in
terests of all the balance of the people of
his district with Mr.. Washburn. Capt.
Castle said (this part of the report was
eighteen months ago.:
Meantime, by industriously talking
withmembers of congress from other states,
newspaper correspondents and others
with whom I became acquainted, have
learned that the numerous lobby of men
from Minneapolis and other Minnesota
towns who were paid $4,000 to go to
Washington in the winter of 1850 to secure
remission of the $25O,OOO penalties in
CURED by pine land trespassers, had Incl
dentally put in some effective work against
no oil sScox L.
pointed out the injury it would be to gulch
mining in California and to manufacturing
in New England. They had represented to
members from Illinois and Iowa that it
was movement to cripple the mills at
Minneapolis, whereby Chicago would
again have monopoly of the lumber sup
ply for the western prairiss, and they had
drawn upon their imaginations in every
direction for effective arguments against
the measure"
This looks very much like 'pine land
ring" And it looks very much like these
were Washburn's constituents whose ''pe-
cuniary interests he went to Washington
to represent to the amount of $25O,OOO in
one single item.
If Washburn don't belong body and soul
to that ring, his strange cooperation with
them to kill this saw dust bill needs expla-
nation.
This explains why he did not dare to an
swer the repeated requests of the chamber
of commerce asking him if he was in ia
vor of this bill. It explains why he and
his fellow traitor Window dare not face a
public audience in this the capital of the
state.
Itexplains why his saw mill friends
got up a corporal's guard of the board of
trade, and had themselves appointed a
committee to Investigate" the saw dust
question, and muddy the water and blind
the people uutll after the election. It OK
plains why Bill King wrote that violently
abusive editorial in the Minneapolis Pho
aeer Press, denouncing the st. Paul cham
Der of commerce as "liars, blackguards,"
ETC., because they were showing up the
work of Washburn and the other pine land
thieves, whose only love for the Mississippi
river is for that portion at and above Min
neapolis as far as the Winnebagoshish res
ervoirs.
Tho fact is Washburn is the tool Of the
pine land ring. The pine land ring are
opposed to the improvement of the Mis-
sissippi river below Minneapolis, and
Washburn dare not so against their ''pe-
cuniary interests" He is for VIM. D.
Washburn first. He is for the saw
mill men (of whom he is one) and the pine
land ring (of which he is the representative
in congress) second. He is for Minneapo-
lis, third Except when he has a railroad to
selD and for the people of his
district last when he wants
their votes). If the people of the
district want man to represent them,
they must elect some one besides w. D.
Washburn. He has shown himself incapa-
BILE of representing anybody but himself,
and his rings and their "pecuniary inter-
ests." Let US return him to his saw mill
and pine land friends and select DR.. Ames
for a change. INDEPENDENT VOTER.
The LabOrer's Friend.
To the Editor of the Globe: