St. Paul daily globe., 1889-02-15
MILLIONS IN LAND.
The Duluth & Winnipeg
Swamp Grant Before a
House Committee.
Gordon E. Cole and w. p
Warner Represent the
Railroad.
What Are Claimed to Be the
Equities Of the
Case ~
A Doodle Lobby Reported to
Be Organized Al
ready.


house held a most important meeting
yesterday afternoon, from until 6, on
the Lightly bill to forfeit the land grant
of the Duluth & Winnipeg Railroad
company. The meeting was public. and
representatives of all the interests in
volved were invited to be present. Of
the committee there were present
Chairman Crossfield, Messrs. Heide-
mann, Stebbins, Wilson, Hanson, F. c.
Stevens, COmstock. jacobson, Roberts,
Underwood, VOllmer. Holmstrom, j. n.
johnson and Farley; also an official
Stenographer. OF prominent outsiders
there were present Gordon E. Cole and
w. P. Warner. for the Duluth q Winni-
peg; President Fisher, of that road;
FL. G. Stone, of the Duluth & Iron
Range; d. e. Meyers and John Cooper,
of st. Cloud; Auditor Braden, Deputy
States Attorney Childs, w. FL. Eustis
and Col. Graves.
In opening the meeting Chairman
Crossfeld noted the receipt of petitions
from KittsOn and Polk counties pro-
testing against the passage of the for
torney for the Duluth & Winnipeg,
then addressed the meeting. first relat-
ing the granting by the state in 1875 to
the Duluth& Iron Range of swamp lands
to the amount of "ten sections per mile
for each mile completed; to be selected
within ten miles on each side OF the
rOad;" and in case sufficient land was
not to be found within these limits, the
company to have the right to select the
balance due it from ungranted swamp
lands i'm st. Louis, Lake and Cook cOun-
ties. The company was to complete It's
road within five years. In 1875 the
state extended the time for this COM
pletion three years. In 1873 the state
granted to the Duluth & Winnipeg such
lands as the Duluth q Iron Range
might forfeit and an additional
grant of ten sections per mile.
In 1883 the state reaffirmed
the Duluth & Iron Range grant of 1875.
Mr.. Cole cited these points, and then
noted that in the act of 1878 the use OF
the words additional time" might be
implied to give the Duluth & Winnipeg
of 1875, and thus make its grant yet uii-
forfeitabie; and he added:
''Under these grants 1878 the Duluth
& Winnipeg began its surveys, did cef9-
tain grading and expended hundreds of
thousands of dollars in good faith. But
in 1881, owing to the influence of ull
friendly legislation, capital which
might have been invested in the road
was frightened away. and the progress
of the road necessarily delayed. AS to
the charge that the road, after it's orig
inal survey, changed its line, may say
that this was done with the wise inten-
tion of securing grade of fifteen feet
to the mile instead of fifty feet" He
pointed out how hf q
LACK OF CAPITAL.
had kept the road back, but that in
1878, gaining some headway, it had COM
pIeted twenty miles, and was already
entitled to 125,O00 acres of the grant.
granting act of 1878 made time limit,
it contained no provision for the for
feiture of the grant. He considered
the case from the point Of the equities.
The road. if completed, would be $50
miles in length, and throw open a vast
and fertile region to markets of easy ac-
cess. 1t proposed to. traverse valua-
BILE pine, mineral and agricultural re-
gion now suffering for lack of rail facil-
tiles. The lands concerned in the grant
could be of no value to the state
for the school fund, since they
were without value if railroads
did not traverse them. The
greatest profit the state could ever de-
sire from them was by making them,
through such grant as this, open to
settlement. Besides. the construction of
this road meant new and powerful
rival for the Canadian Pacific, giving
for Northwest grain short and speedy
route to the great waterways and the
natural channel of trade to Europe. No
other road was proposing to open this
great valley, and no imperative duty
rested upon the legislature to declare
these lands forfeited. The case should
be left with the courts. In closing, he
said with emphasis:
II am informed that the attempt to
hamper and destroy this road is being
made by a certain railroad company
whose territory is invaded"
Mfr. Stone-The Duluth & Iron Range
does not recognize that it has forfeited
any of its grant and is not Interested in
this controversy. (To Gen. Cole) Do
you refer to the Duluth & Iron Range
as trying to inj ure your road?
Gen. COIe-I do not.
w. T. Warner, for the Duluth g. Win
nipeg, said that it was clearly the inten-
tion of the legislature in the act of 1888
to recognize the Duluth & Iron Range
grant and the Duluth & Winnipeg
grant as two distinct things, and not i'm.
voived with each other.