St. Paul daily globe., 1891-01-12
An Expense and Useless Ad-
junct to the Business Ad-
ministpation.
The Two-Headed Bureau in
Which the Two Heads
Were at War.
Either Abolish the Depart
ment or Run It on BuSi-
mess Principles.


as the information must sift through
official channels. Even officialinforma-
ton is not always accessible. and under
this boasted '.business administrator"
the greatest difficulty has been eX-
perienced in getting at the bottom of
many subjects, the full facts of which
the public have right to know. 1t may
be small matter. but it is an Indication
of the autOcratic tendencies of the ring
regime that departmental reports fur
niShed the governor have not yet been
given to the press. From the executive
department they were sent to the print
er, and there they will remain until the
session of the legislature is nearly
through, when it will be too late to
make any searching investigation into
abuses which may be discovered through
these reports. Prior to the business ad-
ministratiOn these reports were fur
nished the newspapers before being
sent to the printer, and in that way
legislators were informed as to what
was being done, or proposed to be done,
in the management of the various state
departments and institutions.
1t is undoubtedly true that Gov. Mer-
riam would rather prefer that search
ing investigations, so far as state de-
partmental work is concerned, be en-
tirely dispensed with. The bowling
success claimed for his administration
cannot be subStantiated. Gov. Merriam
is not to be judged by the work per-
formed in the executive department, as,
so far as the people ure concerned, it is
merely secret pardoning agency for
criminals and disbursing bureau to
| further political ambitions. To properly
| gauge the Merriam business admins
| tration we must
Take a Peep
into the departments, where, we are
safe to presume. the actual work has
been done. 1t is quite proper that we
should do this, because Gov. Merriam
is responsible for the proper working of
these departments, and because, from
the head, to the small Office boy, the
whole of the officials are of his own ap-
| pointing.
The state dairy and food commission
is striking example of gross profiigacy,
| and absolute, utter uSeleSSneSS of many
state departments. The useleSSness of
| this department. is not so much the fault
| of its head as it is that of the governor.
During the last two years the dairy
and food commissioner has been out
rageouSly interfered with in the prose-
| cution of his work, and to that inter-
ference is largely attributable the wide
| spread dissatisfaction over that work.
| The dairy laws and the food laws of
| the state have been pra ,tically a dead
| letter.
Why?
Simply because the commissioners
| hands have been tied by the governor.
In the first place. the appointments
mace in this department two years ago
by Gov. Merriam virtually ended for the
time being its public utility. His ap-
pointment of Dairy Commissioner Ives
was all right, but when he forced FL. G.
Howard on the commission a grave mis-
take was made, and one which any man
with grain of business ability ought to
have known. Ives and Howard
Love Each Other
pretty much in the same way as the
devil loves holy water. They were
candidates for chief commissioner. With
his characteristic spineless indecision,
the governor wavered as to which one
he would appoint. He did not stop to
consider the abilities of the men for the
position; what he pOred over most were
the petitions, recommendation and in
fiuence which each candidate brought
to bear upon him. All this ended in
giving Ives the chief commissionship,,
and Howard that of the first assistant.
making their sal aries $1,000 each year
The war began between the two men
during the candidacy for the head of
the dairy commission never let up.
Howard stationed himself in Minneap-
oils, and there held up the dairy and
food laws to suit his own sweet will.
The efficiency and efficacy of the work
or the whole department may be imag-
lned. Commissioner Ives had not full
control of the department.; one set of
officials were pulling against the other
set, and all because Gov. Merriam had
not the backbone to select one of two
men to control the commission.
What has the dairy and food commits
sion done? The question is pertinent
one.
Ten men have been employed two
years in prosecuting the provisions of
they accomplished? According to the
report of the commission, the state has
'purchased' several thousand ''sam-
Pies which have been analyzed and the
results published. Not the slightest at
tempt has been made to prosecute any
person for selling adulterated foods,
vinegars, liquors, etc. Bnt this is not
all. The report does not say so, but
1t IS
Nevertheless True,
that in even purchasing these samples
the commissioner has been seriously
hampered by the governor. The manu-
facturers and the dealers have protested
against the publication of the fraud they
were perpetrating upon the people, and
out OF which they were growing abnOr-
mally rich. 1t is also said that when
Commissioned Ives began an investiga-
ton about some lard at South st. Paul,
a powerful official stopped the publica-
tion of the results. In this and many
other ways is the chief executive of the
state responsible for the waste full ex-
Denditures of money in this depart |
ment, in that no good has been accom-
plished.
What use is there for dairy and food |
commission if an executive interferes in |
the proper prosecution of its work?
The expenses of this commission for |
the two years ending Aug. l, 1890, were |
S33, ,693. 10, and for this large expenditure |
there is no contra account beyond vol |
ume of S44 pages filed with analyses of |
samples and long-winded reports re-
specting the inspection of barns and
COWS and milk pals and the seizure of a
lew pOuuuS OF OleOlndrgarfne.
No one will deny that food law and
dairy law, if fearlessly operated, will
do great deal of good. But why should
tine laws be allowed to be practically in
operative? Why, pray. employ ten men
to collect and analyze samples. and.
where
Fraud Is Detected,
sit quietly by and do nothing? These
are questions which members of the
present Legislature should weigh well.
An investigation of the dairy and food
commission is imperative and before
that investigation eX-Commissioner
Ives should be supenaed. A friend of
Mr.. Ives has been heard to remark that
during the last two years the governor
has treated him like pickpocket;n
that he has unnecessarily usurped the
functions of the commissioner, and
that The is too much interested in
local companies to allow OF a rigor-
0us prosecution of the food laws.u