Morris tribune. [volume] (Morris, Minn.) 1880-2000, 1890-06-04

find with railroads in this matter.
No, we guess not, nor in various
other matters.
The senator said he voted against
the low interest bill because it pro-
vided that in case that the parties
loaning money were known to receive
more than the per cent. specified in
the bill, either by the party loaning
the money, his agent, or by any means
whatever, the principal should be
forfeited. He said that this would
drive capital out of the state, as east
ern capitalists would not take such
risky chances of losing the money
loaned. With such penalty, said
the senator, the bill was unjust to the
money lender, as he was liable to lose
the entire amount loaned, and conse-
quently he voted against the bill, but
still claimed to be in favor of a low
interest bill. But one thing struck
us quite forcibly, viz: While the SEN
ator expressed sympathy for the
money lenders, for fear that they
might lose their principal, if they or
their agents violated the law, he
seemed to entirely forget to sympa-
thize with the poor farmer who was
forced to borrow money and place a
mortgage on his farm, and if he
violated 1.-The bond" in any particu-
lar, the Shylock who loaned him the
money could foreclose and take his
farm. In other words, the honorable
senator said nothing against the
Shylocks taking their "pound of
fesh." but he did not forget to ex-
press sympathy for them when it was
proposed to put that old Venetian
law" in force which forbids the she'd
ding of zone drop of Christian blood,
on penalty of having their lands and
goods confiscated.'
The senator said he voted against
the Winnipeg land bill and the meat
inspection bill because he believed it
to be his duty to do so, under the cir
cumstances. That he was willing to
admit that some of the bills which he
voted against contained some good
features, but as a whole he believed
them to be wrong. He might have
erred, he said, but he acted in accord
ance with his judgment. We are not
disposed to question his honesty in
this matter, but we must express the
opinion that he erred, and that his
error was in favor of railroads and
combines, instead of the farmers.
Before closing, the senator took
occasion to express his contempt for
newspapers and newspaper editors
said that he was not under obligations
| to any of them; that when he ran for
the senate four years ago only two out
of the twelve newspapers in the dis
trict supported him. E. w. Randall,
who was at that time publisher and
editor of the MORRIS TRIBUNE, sug.
gested that the senator might be mis-
taken, and asked the senator if the
TRIBUNE did not support him at that
time! eff it did, it was but feebly,'
replied the senator. "Then why did
you come to me and kindly thank me
for the support had given your
asked Randall. 4 don't remember
of doing anything of the kind, re-
piled the senator. But you did,
said Randall, "and when you sub.
scribed for the TRIBUNE you asked
me 'how much is there to pay?'
said, 'one dollar and half and you
repeated, well, how much is there to
pay?'" The senator did not remem.
Der anything about this conversation
But to man up tree it looked very
much as though the question, show
much is there to pay?' had peculiar
meaning, and that Randall's reply,
"only $780," rather nonplussed the
senator. The senator evidently came
to the conclusion that he came out
second best in his tilt with Randall,
as he said, eff l have wronged Broth
or Randall, l am willing to apollo
gize.'
Before sitting down the senator
said he didn't propose to reply to
every accusation made against him
by country newspaper editors; they
did not amount to any more than
other men; that they never advocated
any measure in favor of the farmers
until it became popular; that he did
not owe any Of them anything; that
they were crowded upon him; thrust
into his front yard, thirty or more OF
them; that he neither asked or cared
for their support.
After listening to this terrific on
slaught upon newspapers, we felt
almost bad enough to wish that in
stead of being newspaper editor, we
were state senator, SO that we could
legislate for the benefit of the farm
ers, and refuse to "be seen" by rail
road officials and other monopolists.
| Taken as a whole, the session last
Saturday was one of the most inter
esting Alliance meetings ever held in
this county. There were lots of good
things said by the different speakers
an unusual interest was manifested
and we were right glad to be present