St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-03-10

was worth considering compared with
the possibility of the dismemberment
of the nation. Liable at any moment
to find ourselves engaged in a war with
France or England, who hated and
feared us, the whole Pacific coast could
have been ravaged and captured
before our troops could plod
their weary way through deserts
and over mountains. The nation
had to choose between building the
road itself or releasing its first llen.
The senate passed a bill to double the
grant OF bonds. but the house objected,
ana proposed to issue no government
bonds las enacted in '62), but simply to
guarantee the interest for twenty years,
on the bonds of the company, to the
amount agreed upon In 1865, and no
more, and to waive its nrSt lien on the
road. The house committee OF thirteen
reported the bill without dissent
ing vote-Democrats and Republicans
were alike in favor of it. The bill
passed the senate % to 5, the negative
votes being all Democrats. Not single
speech was made against the bill i'll the
senate. 1t passed the house by vote
of 70 to So. Among the yeas were Blame,
Garfield, CreSwell. Deming. Dixon,
George w. Julian, Morril, Schenk, Thad-
deus Stevens, Window, etc. voted for
it. Was | wrong under the clrcum-
stances as they then existed? l think
not. was Republican. elected in 1862
upon the national Republican platform
of 1860, which declared:
"a railroad to the Pacific ocean is
imperatively demanded by thesinterests
Of Ia xr1,n1o the federal p0V-
ernmept ought to render Immediate ana
efficient aid i'm it's constructions"
The Republican leaders i'll congress
agreed that the best mode of aiding the
road was the plan set forth in the BILL
Kirby Smith had just beaten Gen:
Banks at Sabine crossroads. aud
sent him whirling down toward
the gulf; Rosecranz was arrestIng
souri,; Price was threatening st.
Louis; the forces of Lee practically be-
leaguered the national capitol, and the
whole North was seething with the dis
content which afterwards broke out in
the terrible riots of New York city. 1t
was no time to higgle over dollars and
cents. Even Hompe would, l think,
have been patriotic enough to nave
voted for that bill, at that time. unless
some very strong arguments had been
held out to make him do otherwise.
State Mining Tax.
The next charge made by H0mpe is
that voted enormously upon the queS-
ton of the taxation of the iron industry
OF the state.
Under the law existing, prior to the
last session of our legislature "a law
passed in 1881, mining companies were
taxed one cent per ton for each ton OF
iron ore or coal produced. Not, be it
observed, one cent fer each ton
of iron produced, but one cent
for each ton of the rock ore. from which
the iron was to be thereafter extracted.
Now it was proposed, last winter. to
change this system and tax, not the ore,
but the property, the real estate, the
mine. While it is probably true that,in
the case of one wealthy corporation,
''the Minnesota Iron company" this
change would have yielded greatly in
creased revenues to the state. the Ques-
ton was, would such an alteration OF
the law have been generally advisable,
as applied to the whole state?
Now 1t must be remembered that
nothing is so difficult TO estimate as the
real value of mine. Millions of peo-
pie have discovered this to their cost. 1t
is said that more money has been sunk
in the mines of California than has been
taken out of them. In that part of Min
nesota where the iron deposits are
found there are hundreds of thousands
of acres that are not worth, and never
will be worth, one cent an
acre--vast deserts Of rocks and
SwampS, without soil enough to
grow grass. Men are ranging
and prospecting all over this region,
sinking shafts and spending Nancy, full.
of bright aDticipatiOnS, which, i'll nine
ty-One cases out of a hundred. end in
When the assessor
he estimate the value of hole which
some patient proSpect0r is blasting in.
the rocks? He may assess it a million
dollars, and it may turn out to be worth
less; or he may assess it as vaueless.and
before the next assessment comes around
the owners may have taken hundreds of
thousands Of tons of ore out of it. But
it will be said, the assessor can assess
it the next time on the basis of its past
yield. Not at all, for the vein maygive
out the next day; the miners may
"strike a horse" as they, say. The
fortunes of Fair. Flood, OBrien and
Mackay, the California millIonaireS,
were not made by legitimate MIN
ing, but by the fluctuations in the
value of the stocks of mining
companies, due to the striking of
horses" One day the stock would be
booming and the next day it was fiat;
in month they had, perhaps, worked
their way through 1.-The horse" and
everything was booming again. How
can the assessment system be made to
apply to property of that kind? Is it
not better to take percentage from the
product? Then whatever the yield is
the state gets its share. If the share is
not big enough increase it. 1t is like
an income taX-no income, no tax.
And then we owe it to the state to en-
courage the development of this iron
industry. We should not tax the worker
in the rocks until he has developed
something. 1t is claimed thatin twenty
years a reasonable percentage OH the
output Of ouI iron miners will pay all
the taxes of all 1.-THE people of the state.
Why kill the goose that is to lay the
golden egg?
How Hompe Voted 1t.
We raised the rate of tax last winter
from l cent to cents per ton of
ore. l wanted to make it 10 cents per
ton, and advocated that proposition on
the floor. Finding that it would not be
sustained, then moved to make it
cents instead of l cent per ton. Lost
Yeas. 20; nays, "a; Hompe and l both
voted yes. Then l moved to make it
cents. Lost-Yeas, %; nays, %;
Hompe and l again voting yes. The
next day Dr.. Bell moved to make it
AZ cents per ton. Lost = Yeas,
II; nays, "a. / voted yes and
Hompe voted no. He says: "a
test vote was taken in the
matter, and The next day, after the cor
poration had had all night to work the
members (see page SID. the vote STOOD"
etc. l should say so, Mr.. Hompe. April
10you voted to make the tax cents per
ton, and then you voted to make it 4
cents per ton; and April II page SID,
1.-THE next day, after the corporations
had had all night to work the members"
you voted against AZ cents per ton!
And now you intimate that such
change was suspicious. fully agree
with you.
And then page s72) l voted for the