St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-09-10
AGAINST THE PEOPLE.
Republican Leaders Silent
on That Crooked Amend
ment.
Senator Leavitt Tells How the
Minnesota Iron Company
Killed His Bill.
The Partner Of a United
States Senator Was the
Chief Lobbyist.
Facts and Figures Regarding
the Manner in Which the
State Is Defrauded.

| one," remarked well-known Democrat
| yesterday. ''The nomination of PreSi-
dent Harrison over Blaine disguised the
enthusiastic dyed-ln- thewool Repub-
| licans, and, as result, the leaders of the
party are unable to arouse the faintest
! semblance of enthusiasm for the ticket.
| The nomination of Knute Nelson aided
| in this, of course, becauSe-it uncovered
| the eyes of the rank and file of the
| party and showed them in more con-
| vincing manner than could have been
done in any other way, that the Repub-
lican leaders of Minnesota are after the
! offices and care nothing for the princi-
| pies of the party.
There is one point, however" con-
| tinued this gentleman, THAT should he
| brought TO the attention of the people.
| 1t will show clearly that the party lead
ers are against the interests of the peo-
| pie OF this state, 1t is simply this:
why is it that not a single Repub-
lican paper or speaker has told the
people of the danger TO the state in case
of the adoption of that second amend
ment?
docs not this show clearly that the
Republican leaders are i'll favor OF the
! railroad interests? If that second amend
ment is adopted it will practic-
ally abSolve the railroads and mill
ing corporations from contributing
their proper proportion Of the taxes
levied for the support of the state. Let
the people generally understand that
the Great Northern is not only to con-
troll the chief executive of this state i'll
case of Mr.. Nelson's election, but is
also to be given an easy way of avoid
ft,a pf ot 2IH0 con OF q n
taxes, and | do not believe the willy
Knute' will run very strong in the
farming districts. or among the common
people anywhere"
The Mankato Review has been max
ing strong fight against this second
amendment. and has done a great deal
towards Its defeat. Hon. John G. Wise,
the editor of the Review, has prepared
and published clear history of the
whole transaction, and these articles
have been widely quoted and circulated.
peared a letter from s. w. Leavitt, of
Meeker county, Oh the subject, which
should be read carefully by every voter
in the state. In the last Legislature
Senator Leavtt won reputation as an
opponent of jobbery i'll every form,
and made number of gal
liant and successful fights against
Objectionable legislation. He took up
the mining tax law OF 1881, and came
very near securing its repeal and the
taxation of that sort of property as all
other kinds are taxed.
In this letter to the Review he charges
that partner of United States SEN
ator was one of the principal lobbyists
against this equitable and fair measure.
He also shows what the property of
the greatest of these mining companies
is worth. at low valuation.
Senator Leavitt shows clearly that.
under the present law, the people of
this state are annually robbed of sum
to exceed 100000 by the law which
allows the Minnesota Iron company to
pay their taxes upon their output OF ore.
Not Republican speaker has said
word about this great wrong.
The Democracy OF Minnesota stand
pledged to correct 1t.
Senator Leavitt's letter is so fair and
true that not even the attorneys of the
Minnesota Iron company dare attempt
to dispute its statements. 1t follows:
Editor MankaIo Review: My atten-
ton has been called to an article in
your paper relating to the proposed
constitutional amendment known as
Senate File No. 124, in which you say.
referring to the bill as introduced by
myself, land also provided that mining
corporations might be taxed specific
sum upon their products" | enclose
you copy of the substance of the bill
as introduced and also as it now stands
on the statutes of the state. The
changes made in the bill after it passed
the senate are
Written in Italics
(red ink and show that the original in
aE 10 xil hne 81.
the rascality that has since that time
been interviewer in its details. No, sir,
the proposition to tax mining companies
upon their output was not originally
contained in Senate File 124, and is al
most as vicious a proposition as that
embodied in the railroad scheme to
place our present 3 per cent tax upon
their gross earnings at the mercy of a
purchasable Legislature in the distant
future. l will, however, do the pro-
posed amendment the justice to state
that it (the mining scheme) was put on
regularly in the house and slipped
scrutiny. The railroad" proposition
was. l have every reason to be-
lieve, put in dishonesty, and after the
famous House File 157'' manner. |
have not myself examined the files in
the office of secretary of state, but am
informed by Senator McHaie, OF Scott,
that the original bill is not there. But,
MIR. Editor, no matter how either prop
oSition got into the bill, it IS the para
mount duty of every member Of the leg
iSlature who is not owned by mining or
railroad companies and the newspapers
OF the state to see that the
People Are Informed
as to the pit that has been dug for them,
and l have no doubt the people will
bury the amendment in the pit instead
of falling into it themselves.
DThe present mining tax law upon our
books is not only fraud of the deepest
hue, but unconstitutional and class leg
islation of the most pronounced type,
and the proposed amendment is In
tended to make it constitutional. 1t has
been on our statutes for many years,
and the state Officers whose duty is to
test the constitutiouality of the law
have neglected to do so. | spent good
portion of the session of 1891 trying to
get this law repealed, but had such
powerful lobby to fight, with plenty of
money behind it. that | failed to do
SO. 1t would be mighty interesting
reading. Mr.. Editor, to the constitu-
ents Of some of those senators who
opposed the repeal OF this unconstitu-
tiOnal law, and who are now running
for congress, if you would look up the
record and publish their names. might
also add that in nv labors to have this
law repealed l found to my sorrow that
my most powerful opponent in the lob
by, before tile Judiciary committee and
upon the floor of the senate, was trust
ed partner Of
One of Our United States Senators.
who is now seeking reelection. The
jniquity Of the present mining law is
best portrayed by an extract from my
remarks upon the question when it was
before the senate. every word and figure
of which l am prepared to substantIate
by incontroyertable proof.
I'm addition to its being unconstitu-
tional, the law sought to be repealed is
class legislation of the most pronounced
character. Ii provides that all corpora
tons may profit by its provisions, but
no natural person can do so untlI tha