St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-04-20
LET THE CAT OUT.
Sensational Charges Made in
Connection With Senate
File 4.
A LITTLE BREACH OF FAITH
Brings Out a Somewhat Start.
ling Revelation From q
Member.
Mr.. PULLMAN'S OWN BILL
Purporting to Levy a Severe
Tax on Pullman's Own
Cars.
A LITTLE BREACH OF FAITH
Mr.. PULLMAN'S OWN BILL

Wnat was expected to be merely
a routine, uninteresting night ses-
sion of the house turned out last
night to be one of the most sensa.
1onal meetings of the entire ses-
sion, and resulted in the airing of
an unpleasant amount of soiled
linen. The house proceeded at a
very leisurely and orderly manner
to discuss general orders, pausing
few minutes over the Greer di-
Vorce bill and other minor matters,
until it reached a measure which
carries the imposing title of IS. F..
NO 4, an act proposing an amend
ment to the constitution of the state
OF Minnesota to authorize the taxa
ton of the property of sleeping,
drawing room and parlor car, and
other companies and owners, in the
manner therein provided" by Sem
ator Stevens. Even then there was
no especial feeling, and one or two
harmless amendments were sent up.
attracting no particular notice until
Mr.. Douglas sent up an amend
ment prepared by Mr.. Stevens, es-
pecialy enumerating mining COM
panieS among the institutions to be
regulated under the proposed law.
This raised the gorge of the gen.
tleman from Duluth, Mr.. Cant, who
proceeded in a most mastery man
ner to rip the bill open and expose
it's true inwardness. During the dis
cusSion Mr.. Can't admitted that he
had refrained from showing up the
viciousness of the bill on the promise
that the industries of ST. Louis
county should not be mOlested, but
since this amendment had been
clandestinely inserted he felt he was
at liberty to expose what he char
acteriZed as the rottenness of the
bill. He then read carefully the
first twelve lines of the bill, holding
that it was bill with
A CATCHY TITLE, =
and so adro1tly drawn that IT re-
quired a careful analysis to show that
1T was in reality introduced as a
measure of defense for the Pull
man company, and It's only effect,
if adopted, would be to shield the
interests of that company and pro-
vide a powerful lobby for future
legislatures. The bill, he said, pro-
vided no rule by which the different
companies were to be taxed, leav-
ing the manner, rate and all regula-
tons pertaining to such taxation to
future legislatures, and when the
law was adopted the matter would
stand just where 1T is now-that is
the tax could not be levied until
the legislature had fixed it. Further
the law would be such that every
company might be taxed under
different plan, at a different rate
and by a different process, and, as
a matter of course, every Legislature
would be flooded with the lobbyists
of different companies. each seeking
to influence legislation in it's own
favor. The bill conferred no power
that the present Legislature did not
possess, except that it had not the
unlimited authority to fix an arbi-
trary, and, if need be, partial tax
rate for favored corporations. 1t
was a bid for the lobby and d means
of corruption which would result II
untold harm.
1t was thought he would stop
here, but he went further and cut
deeper. He declared that he had
positive information that the Pull
man company, represented by its
well-known lobbyists, was pushing
this bill, and this fact, known to
other members than himself, was
sufficient to damn it as dangerous
measure Two or three times ne
was evidently on the point OF go
ing even further, and on one of these
occasions abruptly took his seat to
avoid saying more than discretion
would warrant.
BLUFF AND BLUFF BACK.
Mr.. Reeves, in answer to him.
stated that the bill had gone through
the judiciary committee without
protest from Mr.. Cant, and it was
singular that he should now devote
such energy to the opposition Of the
bill. In declaring it a Pullman bill
he thought Mr.. Cant was making a
bluff.
At this point Mr.. Dahl, of Henne-
pin, fired shot point blank and at
short range, which no one saw fit
to return. He said he had been =,
told by an ex-member who was
identified with the lobby in various
corporation interests that this was
the same bill which had been intro
duced by the Pulluan company at
a former session, and that there was
money in it for those who could give
it an influential support. He refused
to name the gentleman, but reiter-
ated the statement in such a vigor-
Gus manner that it went unchal-
lenged. He declared that Mr..
Reeves answer to Mr.. Cant was a
more unqualified bluff than the orig
Continued on Fourth Page.