St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-03-29

| they would direct their questions to
him and not take the statements of
outside parties without giving the
friends of the measure a chance to
refute them. The statement had been
made that the bill contemplated
change in the system of land trans
fers, but it was not true and any one
who would take the trouble to COM
pare the bill with the present law
could satisfy himself on this point.
He claimed that the opposition was
SPITE WORK.
Another statement that was untrue
was the one that purchasers of timber
were allowed to go upon the land and
cut the timber upon payment of Is
| per cent OF the purchase price. The fact
was tnat the purchaser must execute
pond for the balance of the ap-
praised value of the timber, and
1ofther that he must pay the re-
Ihalhder OF the purchase price before
removing the timber from the land.
j. u. Jones disclafmed any personal
1eellng In his opposition to the BILL
| He had not the slightest doubt of the
honesty and integrity of purpose of
the trainers and supporters of the bill.
| W AAC Add Sdiu III OppOSlClOn was
based on what he had learned from
examination of the books and records
in the state auditors office. He was
| opposed on principle to the permit
| system, and believed the proper Way
to sell the timber was in the lump.
as was provided in the Dunn bill
lie submitted list of permits and ex-
| tensions covering over zoo 100000 feet
| of growing 1liDa Of tLoeo +h,oo
had been issued since tht pine land
investigating committee had been ap-
| pointed two years ago.
| Mr.. Jacobson-Does that include tha
| extensions?
| Mr.. Jones-It does.
Mr.. Jacobson-The statement is all
right, then.
Mr.. Jones continued and favored
limiting the time for cutting instead
of renewing the permits. If a limit
was fixed purchasers would only buy
what they needed for immediate cut
ting. He declared that he would vote
against the bill, as there were two or
three sections that he was opposed to.
j. N. Jones objected to sectiin 13.
and said the permit system was the
most shameful swindle yer perpe-
trated on the people of the state. He
was opposed to the bill, not on account
OF what some one on the outside had
said, but on principe. He he'd that
the permits could be extended from
year to year, and that the state had
no security beyond the 25 per cent Of
the purchase price. He also claimed
that the bill would entail an injustice
upon the poor man, because the sales
were made in st. Paul instead of in the
county where the timber is located.
Mr. Warner said the bill is one which
interests every man who wishes the
states property cared for and her in
terests protected, and he favored it
as
A JUST MEASURE.
He complimented the public lands
committee, and especially Mr. Staples,
whose experience had amply qualified
him to draw the bill.
Mr.. Mallette said he was not in the
legislature to give the rich lumbermen
what they want, but to represent the
poor people, who are trying to make
homes in the pine country. He held
that the bill does not protect the poor
man as it does the rich one, and re-
ferred to the charge for scaling, which
smaller quantities than for large ones.
He went on to say that the cost was
the same, as the logs are all in the
river. In this he was in error, for the
bill provides that the scaling shall be
done upon the land, before the timber
is removed. He objected to selling
only the damaged timber; opposed
what he called the contract system,
n, nd LOT oI h.
edy it. Speaking of the intimation that
the opponents Of the bill were trying to
hold up some one on the outside he
said Bob Dunn has never approached
him on the subject, and that he had
not talked with any one about the
bill.
Mr.. Jacobson said the favorite method
Of defeating bill was to claim, as had
been claimed on the floor yesterday
afternoon, that sufficient time had not
been afforded in considering the meas
ure. Ample time had been afforded to
consider and discuss this bill, as it
had been printed and on the desks of
members for over a month. The oppo-
sition did not propose amendm ants to
the bill, either in committee or on the
floor of the house. at is easy enough
to find fault and whine" continued
Mr.. Jacobson, 'but it is not so easy to
apply an intelligent remedy where an
evil exists. Why have they not. of
fered amendments, instead of waiting
unit the last minute to defeat the bill?
The question is not whether a better
law could be framed, but whether this
is better than the present law, and if
it is better it is the duty of
EVERY HONEST MAN
to vote for it. When the gentleman
from Todd stands up and says the
sales of timber will go on as they did
before he says what he knows is not
so. He also says that he knows of
another system, but does not say how
it works. We don't want to sell the
timber, but to preserve it, as the bill
provides. Under this bill very little
timber at best can be sold, and if the
gentlemen are so anxious why not Of
fer an amendment striking out the pro-
vision which allows any to be sold
j. ID. Jones replied and claimed that
Mr.. jacobson had not treated him fair
~ In his remarks. He called attention
to his effort to have the Dunn and
Staples bills considered together. in
order to make one good bill of the two.
He had asked time to consider the bill,
but it had been railroaded through by
those in charge of it.
j. N. Jones again opposed the bill
and claimed that under the provisions
of section 26 the purchasers have the
long end of it,
Mr.. Scof1eld held that the main pro-
visions of the two bills were well
known to the members They had
been considered by the joint commit
tee on public lands of the two houses
and the decision was unanimously in
favor Of the Staples bill For the first
time this session an attempt had been
made to overthrow the report of a
committee, and when the house had
decided in favor of the principle in the
Staples bill, that ought to decide the
matter. He then paid high conpli-
ment to the men who had framed the
Dill. who, he said, are honest men, and
they are not working in tho ip+aras+