St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-07-23

"A Statement of Much Interest
Hon. John L. Macdonald publishes an
elaborate reply in the representative to
a communication of one John H. Burke,
%Rssailiug }. j. Hill and the citizens of ST.
Paul who recently did him honor. The
meat of the accusation is one which has
not been ~infrequently heard, to wit:
That the Dutch boudholderS of the old
st. Paul & Pacific were wronged by Mr..
Hill and his associates. Mr.. Macdonald
sets that story at lest very thoroughly
in the following manner:
l am not numbered among Mr.. HIPS
Intimate friends. but | believe in the
Divine command Thou shalt not Dear
false witness:'' and also that he who
hears such untrue testimony, knowing
1t to be such, and does not contradict it,
is little better than the false witness:
and, so believing. | wish to remove a
false impression that has been created
In the minds of many, in the manner l
have Indicated.
1t is impossible to discover what good
purpose is to be accomplished by the
publication of such a communication,
and the writer can have no other
object than to cast a cloud upon
the integrity and honesty of the
manner by which Mr.. Hill and
his associates acquired the st. Paul &
Pacific railroad and its lines and prop
Prty; and, IN any event, he has nor
been as careful as to the facts in this
Ease as such assailantS should always
be. But before showing that, in pub
fishing that opinion of the court, upon
the demurrer to Mr.. Farley's complaint,
he does Mr.. Hill a great injustice. |
will state some facts relating to this
transaction which are personally known
20 myself, promising with the statement
that if the Holland holders did not get
all they might otherwise have received,
they owe it to their own blind stubborn
ness.
AS l was a member of our state senate
when the legislation hereinafter re.
ferred to was enacted, know whereof l
affirm, in relation thereto. The general
facts, relating to that purchase, are as
follows: Being in default, the st. Paul
& Pacific company cam before the
legislature of 1873 for an extension of
time to complete the road, and it was
granted until January l, 1874, to do so.
Failing to do anything that year it aD-
P4AShN "a -A4C 1ooAOl ~ 4CA1s II al Ca
tension. In the meantime, c~itizeus of
Minnesota, notably the then railroad
building firm of Degraff, Crooks
* Co., came before the legislature and
complained that they had not been paid
for most of the construction of the lines
from Watab to Brainerd and from st.
Cloud to st. Vincent, and asked that
they be protected by giving them a lien
Oh the granted lands or otherwise. This
fla lnpiSiafnrR nf 1874 did and urnnfnh
the extension upon condition of the paw
ment of those debts. The Holland bond
holders and stockholders (WhO, in fact,
constituted nearly the whole company
FOOliShly refused to accept this leglSla-
EOn or continue the construction of the
railroad upon these terms, and they
again in 1873 came before the legiS-
iaJure asking for an extension but with
DGt conditions. This extension was also
granted; but with the condition that
400, 600 acres of the land granted to it be
Set apart and reserved to the state, to
pay those debts due our citizens. This
extension the Hollanders also again
stubbOrnly and foolishiy refused to ac
cept, and the road went into the hands
Of a receiver (Alr. Farley and Soon after
was sold under il foreclosure of the
mortgages upon it. Evidently these
dOllanderS had 10 idea of what the
future possibilities of that railroad
were, and do not appear to have had
Eorethought enough 10 investigate.
1t was after these gentlemen had con-
Guided to let the enterprise 90 by de-
fault, that MIR. Hill appeared upon the
scene. With that sagacity for which
he mas since become noted, he discerned
the magnificent future for that railroad
which has been realized in the Great
Northern railway system. and he set to
work to induce capital to join him IN Sc
curing the st. Paul q Pacific railroad.
which was then going begging for a
purchaser. He had been engaged with
Commodore KittsOn in the tranSporta-
ton business of the Red River of the
North, and he knew the possibilities
Of that country, and through that
was enabled to christ Mr.. Kittson;
Rrter which it was easier to enlist S T.
Donald A. Smith, MIR. Stephens and
others. l personally know hat at thai
time any gentleman who had means
could join in the enterprise, and that
Mr. Hill solicited and urged all of our
eltlZenS who were supposed to have
money to do so. All such had an op-
pOrtunity to embark in his enterprise,
or organize one of their own. But the
truth is, that he alone seemed to realize
what the future had in store for those
who would JOIN with him and make it a
success. In common with many others,
/, at this time, heard him predict
and describe, with an accuracy that
today is marvellous to me, the future
growth and development of the region
OF country which would be land is now
traversed by and tributary to his then
projected railway. 1t then appeared to
be the improbable idea of an euthuSi-
asst; today l behold it all a reality. He
succeeded III enlisting capital to buy
this railroad and its land grant and
rights and franchises. and bought it at
the highest it could then be sold for:
and who can say that, as things then
appeared, it was not all it was then
worth? If not, why did not others bid
for il?
Dir. hill and his associates undoubt-
eddy purchased thai railroad at a bar
gain, but in doing so they simply took
advantage of the circumstance which
rendered 1t possible Tor them to do so,
and Of an opportunity that was then
open to others. Whatever ground the
q, directorate of the Great Northern rail-
road. with MI. Hill at its head, NAV
have furnished for criticism, as to its
conduct and management, 1 am salts
fed that there IS none for in|sinuating
that these Holland D~OndhOlders and
stockholders were defrauded by MIR.
Hill and his associates.
Now. as to the decision of the court
which Mr.. Burke sets forth in his com
munication: That decision was simply
upon the legal question raised upon the
demurrer to Mr.. Farley'S cOmplainD as
10 whether IA person acting in the fidu-
ciary capacity of receiver, could legally
enter into such a contract as he claimed
70 have made with Messrs. Hill and
kittsoH. As receiver, Mir. Farley was
an officer of the court, and the condem.
nation Of the transaction by that court
was aimed 1T Mr.. Farley. who, it should
be borne in mind, was in that suit
claiming that ne had While such re-
celver entered into an agreement
with Messrs. Hill and Kittson by