New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1894-10-31
TIMBER THIEVES WAN x'M' !.
Hermann Was q Good State Audito,
For Lumber Companies.

| ava 0U4ANOA
But Bob Dunn and Governo
Nelson Brought the lLumbe
Companies to Their Knees
and They Have Paid the
State Thousands Of Dollars
and Will Pay, Thousands
More-How Biermann Dis.
posed of Standing Pine.
Every timber thief in the State of Min
aesota. every man and every corp CRATIC.
that hopes in the future to get pine tim
Der from the states lands without paying
Tor it it's full market value, is honestly il
favor of the election of Mr. A. Biermann
as state auditor, and Mr.. S. NJ. Owen q.
governor.
This rather remarkable condition O
things requires some explanation; and tn
explanation afforded by an Investigation
OF timber frauds in the past, and by tn,
evidence produced in the suits which hav
compelled restitution to the state form.
an interesting and instructive chapter O.
political history. These facts are nov
laid before the people of Minnesota il
their entirety for the first time, and every
voter is asked to study them carefully anc
to consider their bearing upon his actor
at the coming election.
First Public Notice of Timber Stealing,
The subject of illegal appropriation OF
pine timber belonging to the state was
first brought to the public notice just
prior to the meeting of the last state legis
latrre. State Auditor Biermann had ad
vertised for sale the land of the famous
section Sc, afterward the subject of sc
much controversy. At the sale referred to-
the land was not sold, and the lumbermen
interested were told by Mr.. Biermann, on
inquiry, that this land had been with
drawn, because it was already sold to c. A
Smith s. Co. Mr.. Biermann first stated
that this had been done at prior public
sale; afterward he confessed that the sale
was private. Several persons DESTROYS OF
purchasing this section, because of the ex-
cellent quality of it's timber, were indig-
nant at this, and proceeded to investigate
into the facts.
Biermann's Deal With Smith s. Co.
1t was found that Mr.. Biermann had
been approached by parties DESTROYS OF
purchasing, and that an arrangement had
been made beforehand, the substance of
which is found in letter written Jan. %,
1892, by Mr.. Biermann to G. A. Smith &
~ laI 49, l.
they were cutting timber on the adjoining
section, that there was not sufficient of it
to make full seasons work, and that
they would like to purchase the timber on
36 in order to fill out. In his letter of reply
occurred the following significant SEN
fences:
"While the estimate is not large, have
no doubt but it will cut dou. lie the amount
estimated do not make it a rule to sell
any stumpage at private SALE AS you are
cutting on section % next to it, and it will
likely burn next spring, it will be in dan
ger of fire next spring and I will let you
have it at 1925 per thousand and give you
to June i, 1898, to cut and remove the
same'
Hermann Was Generous, But why9
This is good sample Of Mr.. Biermann's
generous ana accommodating disposition
He had no doubt it would cut double the
estimate. He did not make it rule to
sell at private SALE He had an idea that
this particular section would burn by the
following spring if G. A. Smith & Co. did
not get it, and they finally did get it; not at
81 a thousand, which competent judges
aftcrward testified it to be worth, not even
at s2.25, as Mr.. Biermann had written,
but at S.
1t was the knowledge of these facts that
prompted the legislative investigation,
ment of a legislative committee to look
into the matter A majority of that COM
mittee, consisting of one Democrat, one
Populist and, at the last moment, one Re-
publican, reported in favor of letting the
matter drop Mr.. Dunn and Mr.. Fleming
filed a minority report containing the
damaging evidence. Not satisfied with
that Mr.. Dunn then introduced the fol-
lowing resolution, whose passage he Sc
cured April II, 1898:
Resolved, That this house of represent
tatives, the senate concurring, does here
by request the governor to take such
prompt action as he may deem necessary
10 secure a Iull ana 1urCQer 1nVeSClgdCAOU
in the courts of the sale of section 36''
Governor Nelson Acted Promptly and
Vigorously.
This threw upon Governor Nelson the
entire responsibility of bringing to justice
the depredators on the pine lands of the
state. 1t is by his faithful discharge of
that duty that he has won their active op-
position and undying enmity. The gov
ernor at once set on foot an investigation
of his own, and became convinced that the
transaction was a shady one. A suit was
brought against G.. A. Smith & Co. in
July, 1898. In explaining his connection
with the matter, Mr. Biermann's defense
was simply that he had right, under the
law, to do what he h ad done.
Trial Disclosed Some Queer Things.
On the trial of the case it appeared that
Mr.. Biermann had stated in the permit is
sued that there were 700, 900 feet of timber
whereas, in fact, there were $500, 900; and
while Mr. Biermann had sold the timber on
section SO on January 26th, 1892, at pri-
vate sale, yet when he made out the per
NIT, he dated it back to December It'll
1891. This was because there had been q