New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1898-10-19
Eustis and the Corporations,

Eustis and the Corporations.
When William Henry Eustis was may
or of Minneapolis the city council passed
an ordinance requiring the street rail-
way company to deliver at the junction
or intersection of any of its lines trans
fer to any passenger demanding the
same, providing that "said transfer be
issued to said passenger from aud upon
the car upon which said passenger had
paid his full fare.''
THIS ordinance was passed unani-
mously, but William Henry Eustis as
mayor vetoed 1t.
In his message to the council he took
the strange ground that the railroad
companies should be consulted in all
these things.
1t required the district court to 5ring
him to time and lay down the rule that
there were certain things that the people
could demand as rights without waiting
to have them conferred as corporate fa-
vors.
Now, judging from this record of Mr..
Eustls, what is apt to he lis attitude
towards the corporations if it should so
happen that he were elected governor?
Would he, as in the case Of this trars-
fer ordinance, veto all legislation dis
tasteful to the corporations? Would he,
as heretofore, ignore the rights, conven-
fence and welfare of the public, in or
der to still further enrich the corpora
tions of the state? Shall we be told by
the governor of Minnesota, as we we're
by the mayor of Minneapolis, that in
dealing with corporations we should
task as favors" those things which it is
our privilege to "demand as rights y
and that a mere "request on the part Of
the public" from these monopolies is
not permissible unless "their business
interests are not made to suffer" should
they comply Herewith?
No man has ever sat in the guberna-
torial chair of Minnesota who had be-
fore hand so demonstrated his unfitness
to administer laws and public interests.
AS mayor he boldly set aside such ordi-
nances as he did not choose to enforce,
and by his veto power thwarted the le-
gislation of the city lawmakers, in favor
of the corporations. What mattered it
that he had held his hand aloft and sworn
to execute the laws and ordinances!
What would it matter, as governor? The
Eustis principle would endangcr every
interest of the people. What reformer
would this be to right the crying needs
of the farmers for protection against the
binding Irvine iniquities, in the sale of
the states product to those dealers hav-
ing the political "pull, $50 that the farmer,
for whose benefit the Irvine is supposed to
be manufactured, must purchase from
the favored dealer at his marked up
price, when he was to have had it at
cost! Imagine "Governor" Eustis cor
recting this evil by application of his
principle that we should ask Gas favors',
what we should demand as rights. APP
piled to appointment of railway COM
missioners, he would simply ask of the
railway companies whom they would
have appointed; of the elevators he
would merely request that they re-
form the crying outrages of grain in
spection and under grading. All legis-
lation regulating the corporations or fav-
ored interests would certainly be We
toed, unless it was shown tina. they had
''been consulted on these things" Adj
ministratlon of the matters of taxation,
of the public lands, of the school fund,
the mining industry, and all the great in
terests of the state, must be such that
none Of the corporations are ssmade to
suffer-" for has he not declared that cor
porations always yield to .any reasona-
BILE request on the part of the publie2"
Stick to your business with the glue
Of industry. .