St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-04-12

administration that the number of
grains in the gold coins was reduced
in 1884 to make them conform to the
silver unit, then why not continue
the process now, and be logically
consistent in it? With silver at 65
cents an ounce, the gold dollar, in
stead of 25.8 grains, should contain
exactly IS grains. This plan would
have at least the merit of honesty
and consistency.
GIVE THEM ANOTHER, GOVERNOR
Gov. Clough has returned one bill
without his approval on the suffi-
cient ground that it is unconstitu-
tionaI. The senate and house have
given him another opportunity to
return to them another measure
more vicious in it's tendencies and
more clearly unconstitutional than
is the one he vetoed 1--WE refer.to that
bill which offers to the men who may
engage in refining beet sugar a
bounty of cent a pQundzs-a -
In the first place it isneediess. In
the discussion of Similar measure
proposed in the legislatures of 1891
and 1893 it was elected that the
beets grown in the southern part of
the state exceeded the percentage
of German beets in the quantity of
saccharine matter they contained.
It was shown that, on this basis,
there was an ample margin of profit
for the capital that might be in
vested in it. This showing, made in
aid of the proposed bounty, was suf-
ficient evidence that this was an in
duStry that did not need state aid
to prevent those bodies from passing
the bill. The same conditions eX-
list now; and the field should be left
open for development by private en-
terprise and capital.
Another sufficient reason. Every
body knows that the sugar
trust absolutely controls the sugar
markets and production in this coun-
try. The few so-called ''independ-
ent' refineries are dependent on it.
No refinery here could operate
without it's sanction. 1t has the job
bers by the throat and they could
not buy the local product if the
trust said not. If a refinery is built,
it will be built or controlled by the
trust. Does the governor think it
advisable to have the people of this
state taxed to increase the power of
that monopoly?
Thus far on grounds of expediency.
On those of justice to the people of
the state engaged in other vocations
and who must be taxed to pay this
bounty, is it fair or just or right to
add to their burdens by compelling
them to contribute to the esta blish-
ment of others in business? Is it
right to those using their own CAPT
tai, earning it by use of brain and
muscle, building up their business
in open competition, unaided by the
state, to-make them share the cost
of developing another industry out
of which others may make profit?
How can you ask the farmers of the
state, already handicapped in their
struggle, to submit to a tax that
gives them no return? 1t is not right
to tax all that some may gain.
1t is unconstitutional. 1t is not
within the purpose or scope of gov
eminent declared in the first section
of the bill of rights. It takes the pri-
vate property of the citizen for a
private purpose without compensa-
ton, a thing prohibited by section
Ii even where the purpose is public
one. 1t matters not whether the
or condemnation, the effect is the
same. No court has yet sustained
this taking by taxation for pri-
vate purpose, and the supreme court
Of the United States, in 20 Wallace,
657, expressly denied such power.
The court there said: ITO lay with
one hand the power of government
on the property Of the citizen, and
with the other to bestow it on IA
vored individuals to aid private en-
terprises and build up private fort
unes, is none the less a robbery be-
cause it is done under form of law,
and is called taxation
To the claim that it would be a
public benefit to the town to have
established in it, the
court made answer: 1.-THE same
may be said of any other business or
pursuit that employs capital or
abor. The merchant, the mechanic,
the inn-keeper, the banker, the build
ar, the steamboat owner, are equal
y promoters of the public good and
deserving of the aid of the
citizens by forced contributions. No
line can be drawn in favor of the
which would not open
the Golfers of the public treasury to
the opportunities of two-thirds of
the business men of the city or
town.
With this clear enunciation of the
nconstitutionality of any use of
he taxing power to aid any industry
we submit that the governor finds
ample ground for Withholding his
signature from this most pernicious
measure and dangerous precedent.
Should he, however, approve it, not
4 dollar will be drawn from the
treasury in payment of any sugar
bounty until after the court of last
resort has decided that this bounty
giving is a legitimate use of the
taxing power of the state. There are
yet citizens of Minnesota that will
not submit to this law-clothed ex-
tortion.
QUERIST ANSWERED.
F. N. Stacy, in his letter given
place elsewhere, asks us if, in our
opinion, the contention of the gold
standard men that the fall in silver
price is wholly" due to the in