St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-04-07

proceedes to discuss the bill which APP
peared in the legislature in 1889 and
1891 to extend the time in which the
Duluth & Winnipeg Railroad company
could build its road Ill order to hold its
swamp land grant. And with his usual
subtlety he tries to cloud the question
over by talking of the evils of land
grants in general, and of the amount of
land voted by congress for land grants
in all parts of the United States. Now
the truth is that no bill to create land
grant was pending in the legislature in
in 1889 and 1891. The land grant to the
Duluth & Iron Range Railroad company
was made seventeen years ago. and four
teen years ago it was transferred by the
state TO the Duluth & Winnipeg; and
March 10, 1885, the legislature pro-
vlded that ii the latter road did
not comply with the terms of its charter
the land grant should go to the st. Paul,
Brainerd d Northwestern Railroad com
pany, an enterprise controlled by the
Great Northern line. of which James j.
Hill is president. The question of the
Dropriety or wis dom of land grants was
not in Issue; the battle was between the
powerful Great Northern corporation
and feeble corporation, the Duluth 81
Winnipeg. of which Mr.. Fisher is pres
ident. Hompe recognizes the truth of
this statement in his letter. The issue
was: Should the Great Northern hold
the monopoly Of the carrying business
of the Red river valley, or should an in
dependent and rival line penetrate that
region, from Duluth, giving the people
another outlet and competing rates?
And Bompe, as usual, took the side or
the more powerful corporation and
against the interests of the people of
his section. And he explains the reasons
for this very clearly. lie says:
''In the senate it (the Duluth d Win
nipeg extension bilD was defeated 1850,
it is said, by the lavish use of money on
the part of the Manitoba company. 1t
seemed to be land against money, and
money won"
ssSpOt Cash.,
Precisely; and Hompe voted on the
side of the money. In his clear dis
cernment, YOU can see that lands are
not to be considered. for one moment.
in competition with ''Spot cash." Old
settlers will remember the story of
Hon. Joseph RoIette, of Pembina, who.
thirty years ago, was offered $4,000
of stock of one of the old land grant
railroad companies to assist them. The
officers of the company assured him
that in few years that stock
would be worth $4,000. That is
all very likely, gentlemen" said
the astute Frenchmen, ''but if it is all
the same to you | would prefer $3.50 in
cash." He got the cash, and tue stock
was never worth penny. Hompe
would sympathize with this practical
wisdom. He voted against the Duluth
81 Winnipeg bill, which didn't have the
money, ard for the other bill which did.
And yet he saw that the interests OF ms
constituents demanded that III this hight
between two railroad corporations he
should vote for Mir. Fisher ana against
Mr.. Hill, for he says:
The reason why the Manitoba com
pany opposed the bill was BECAUSE 1t
did not desire the road built, as it would
be competitor for the trade OF the Red
river valley"
Was this not the very reason why he
should have voted for the Duluth bill?
Was it not in the interest OF the Red
river valley that it should have com
peting line direct to Duluth. instead OF
being left poWerleSS in the hands OF the
Manitoba monopoly? And does not
Hompe live in the Red river valley;
anu is he not anxious TO represent that
very region, which he SO betrayed, III
congress?
A man to be a successful liar should
make the talsehoOd at one end OF
paragraph cohere with the falsehood at
the other end OF it. Hompe has just de-
cIared that the fight was one between
money and lands, and that the money
won, and that he voted on the side OF
money. At the close Of the same para
graph he says:
But the house of 1891 was composed
of different class OF men from the
house of 1889. The most of the Alliance
members, reinforced by a number OF
honorable Republicans and Democrats,
waged a fierce and protracted fight
against the measure. 1t was question
OF pine land against principle, but pine
land won in the end
Principle and Money.
Really. this is the first time | ever
knew that principle" was a synonym
Tor money in Otter Tail county. This
perhaps explains Hompe'S whole politi-
cal career. He is IA man OF principle"
And then he charges that L voted to
suspend the rules TO give the bill
chance to be considered. Under the
constitution of the state bill has to be
read on three different days. unless the
rules are suspended; and in this case
the bill had reached the senate on the
last day it could be acted en-. II dld'not
follow that / would vote for the bill
itself, when it came up. The vote to
suspend the rules was simply matter
of courtesy and fair play to Senator
Stockton and others to give it hear
ing. And observe the shocking dishon-
esty of this man Hompe: He gives the
vote, on page 1o41 Of the senate jour
nal, where voted to suspend the rules,
and omils to state that, OH the
same day, the motion 10 suspend
the rules, on the same bill,
came up again (see page 1851, and that
| voted against suspending the rules.
Surely, if / deserve TO be denounced Tor
the first vote | deserve to be praised for
the last vote, and the two votes thus
equalize each otber. But Hompe. with
magnificent mendacity. ignores the last
vote altogether, and proceeds to de-
nounce me as voting for land grant,
when no saclI question was at issue;
the motion was simply to suspend the
rules; and if that motion had prevailed
the whole battle would have been:
which of two railroad corporations
should have an existing land grant.
l was really in doubt how to vote on
the question. My synpatflies were nat