The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1894-10-10
GOV. NELSON'S new SPEECH.
Continued from First Page1

WI --ooT W. ~ --o'''
Continued from First Page)
if you give them IL majority in both
branches?
He boasts of the last session but
what did it doS Ii increased the ap-
out" at Chicad $Hp, 900 over the $780,
900 voted in A8 And what for?
What benefit MS HE state realized?
It gave lot Eof& citizens fat places
and big tre4 ut wherein is the
common votee 81 better off? And
our little state building at the
Worlds Fair was'lost in the grandeur
of the general display It was as con-
spicuous as tly-speck on locomotive
wheel. We appropriated $4,000 to
cheaper the price of the farmers
Irvine. The Republicans spent $780,
COO to exhibit a stuffed moose, and a
commission of worthy gentlemen, who
were better stuffed than the moose be-
fore they got through. Our work will
endure for years. Where is the moose
and the commission and the elbow
out" now? Where is that $3.50, 1000?
What next? They initiated an ex-
penditure of two million dollars to
build new state capitol, by leyying a
tax on the people; and their Supreme
court then killed our State Elevator
bill, which might have enabled the
people to pay the tax. Nothing that
will help the people lis constitutional
in Republican courts.
What else? 4s
The Governor says they passed an
important law to enable farmers to
build elevators on the right Of way
Of railroad companies, or to get side
tracks if they built on their own land.
Very opportunity, Mr.. A. III. Hen
Erickson, Secretary Of our State ALI
ance, sends us the following letter,
which shows the practical operation
of these laws and their futility to help
the producers.
ERSI<INE. Mimi, Sept. &c, 1894.
H. A. Hendrickson, Secretary State Farm
ers' Alliance, Sank Center, Mimi
Dear Sir: I thought l would write you a
few lines in regard to the Northwestern
Grain Growers Association, also inform
ing you to the experience we have had
here at Erskine with the Great Northern
Railway Company in endeavors to
obtain lease for a site for an elevator or
warehouse
AS secretary of our Alliance (Scandia Al
lance No. 64n. ! RECEIVED your circular adj
vsing the necessity of organizing a local
Grain Growers Ass 3eiation. We have not
oo1 1od for c,Jnh rot
have been awaiting the result of our
appica ton for site for elevator from
the railroad company. Ii we cannot get
location site for Our elevator or ware
house from the failroad company, 1 don't
see much use in organizing a Grain Grow
ers Association. i III
We have organized Ia Farmers Elevator
Company here amid incorporated under the
cooperative law of Iithis state (style of
company is THE Farmers Elevator Com
pany of Erskine'e. piIt is stock COM
pany. We applied for a site for an ele-
vator or warehouse of1the size of 20X40, 16-
foot posts exclusive OF cupola. at an esti-
mated capacity of 10000 bushels. The OBJ
lection of the raiiroad3 company to grant
ing us the site is1 thatIthe house would be
too small. Theyt don't care to grant sites
for elevators of less capacity than 10000
bushels; so they say in their refusal.
We applied for a site in accordance with
the new law of 1893, and stated (and ten
dered) the amount we deemed reasonable
as compensa ton to the company for such
site, namely an annual rental of $500.
Having been refused, then, according to
that law, could now, of course, take an
appeal to the district court. If we should
be successful enough to win in that court,
the railroad company has right to appeal
to the state supreme court, and what
chance would we stand there? Most likely
the result would be the same as in the
state warehouse or elevator (at Duluth)
case, and we would incur great expenses,
disrupt our company and receive no
dress.
There is law (also of 1889, entitled,
"An act to provide for the construction of
sidetracks and switches upon the right of
way of railroad companies, to elevators,
warehouses, mills or manufactures. To-
Gated lands adjacent to the right of
way of any railroad company in this
state" Now, ] don't know which one of
these two laws it would be best to pro-
coed under. 1t seems it rests entirely with
the railroad and warehouse commission to
decide under this law last referred to- in
case the owners of such proposed elevator
and the railroad company cannot agree as
to "terms and conditions On the other
hand, the first law takes the matter of
dispute into the courts. According to both
laws, it seems to me, it is only question
as to comDensa ton to the railroad COM
pany for constructing, maintaining and
operating such sidetrack. So in both
cases it would be a matter of expense to
our company This seems queer to COM
mon people, erecting more elevators
there is now only one elevator at Erskine)
would naturally build up the market and
thus bring more wheat to Erskine and
more traffic to the railroad company. Err
skine is also a competing market with
Fertile and Red Lake Falls, on the North
ern Pacific railroad, a rival road. Re
spectfully yours J. E. OPPEGAARD,
President Farmers Elevator Company of
Erskne
But the governor says the Ware
house law, passed in 1878, known as
':the Governors BILL" was of great
benefit to the farmers. We would
like to know where that benefit comes
in. We do not know that several Off
GERS of farmers warehouse-companies
have complained, through the col
umns of this paper, that this law
compelled them to shut up their build
ings, and left the people more COM
pletely than ever at the mercy Of the
Elevator Combine.
And the Governor says that the ex-
penditures of the Legislature, in 1891,
for legislative expenses, officers, etc,
were very much tgreater than in 1898.