The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-02-18
SENDS In VETO NO |.
GOV. LIND RETURNS THE SUGAR
BOUNTY MEASURE WITHOUT
SIGNATURE
NOT FRIENDLY TO BouNTIEs

the Treasury to an Unlimited Ex-
penditure of the states Funds
| Money Now Due Under the Law
| of 1S05-The Governor Suggests
Other Liquidation.
| Gov. Lind rather surprised the mem
bers Of the legislature as well as the
friends Of the sugar beet industry yes
terday by vetoing the bill recently
passed authorizing the payment of
$19,975 to the Minnesota Beet Sugar
company
The veto measure reached the house
at very inopportune time for the
friends of the pig iron bounty bill, as
that measure was about to be placed orr
It's final passage when the sergeant-at-
arms announced "a message from the
| governor.
business was suspended and after
Mr. staples. who was in the chair had
! glanced over the document, 1t was read.
Gov. Lind in his veto while deprecatns
the bounty policy took the ground that
under the law of 1895, which provided
for the payment of a bounty on sugar,
| there was no provision limiting the
time during which the bounty should
be paid or the aggregate amount to be
disbursed
He raised no objections to the pay
ment of the money specified in the bin
which he vetoed. holding that the state
was liable for the bounty already ac-
| crued. The point he made was that
the act OF 1888 should be so amended as
| to limit the amount to be paid and
provision made for funds to pay the
| claims which had been presented to
| date.
On motion Of Mr.. Jacobson Rep.), Of
Lac qui Parle, the message was laid
| on the table after the chair had ex-
| planned to MIR. Winston Oem), of Hen
nepin, that the same would be pub
lished in the journal
TEXT OF THE MESSAGE.
The veto message reads as follows:
Hon. "A. N. Dare, Speaker Of the House of
Representatives-Sir: By chapter 205 of
the General Laws of Minnesota for 1896 the
! legislature of this state provided for the pay
men of bounty of l cent per pound to pro-
| ducers of sugar from beets. sorghum or other
sugar yielding canes plants in this state
That act contained no limitations whatso-
ever, either as to the time during which
| the bounty shall be paid or as to the aggre-
gate amount that may be claimed by any
person or corporation. Without entering into
any discussion as to the wisdom of egisla-
| ton of that character, which in my judg-
ment cannot be justified on principle, it seems
plain to me that If the legislature of this
to take the property of one taxpayer and
transfer it to the private use of another,
which can only be justified, II at ALL upon
a theory that 1t is good public policy to en-
courage men to undertake an industry which,
when established, would be of lasting advan-
tage to the commonwealth, then the aid
bounty must necessarily be temporary in its
| character, for I have never heard it ad-
vanced even under the plea of public policy
that it was justif1able to permanently take
! the property Of one taxpayer and transfer it
| to another's private use to enable the latter
| to carry on an industry which, but for such
| aid, would not be profitable OF self-sustain-
| ing. 4.
This being the position Of those who sane
ton the granting of bonuses or bounties
FROM THE PUBLIC TREASURY
to individuals. It follows that even under
! that view the legislation by which the grant
is made should limit the length of time dur
| Ing which such bounty should be paid, as
| we'll as the maximum amount to which the
state could become liable, for otherwise the
| treasury may be looted before the people are
| aware of the obligation incurred. This I'M
! pleasant contingency has arisen in many of
our sister states where the questionable prac-
tice Of bount1es has been sanctioned.
The corporation which will claim the ap-
| preparation by H. F. 1885, entitled "An act
to appropriate money to meet any claim
claims made under the provisions of chap
ter 205, General Laws of 1885, relating to the
manufacture of sugar and paying bounty
therefore appears to have earned $19.975 I'M
| der the legislation of 1895, In the first year
| of Its business 1t has been stated by Its
officers. and I assume correctly, that with
| sufficient quantity of beets (Which 1t did not
| have last season. 1t can increase the produce
| ton over that of last year by at least LEO
per cent, and perhaps treble it. which would
| mean that before your body meets again a
| claim for bounties might be incurred to this
corporation alone exceeding 100000 Other
corporations may come forward with claims
for at least two seasons. This convinces me,
| in view Of the state of our finances and the
burdens already borne by our taxpayers. to
| say nothing about the questionable char
| acter of the bounty policy itself, that 1t is
xl1o -
| amended to plainly and specifically limit
| the extent to which the treasury of the state
may become subject to claims hereunder.
UNWIsE AND UNJUsTIFIABLE.
To assume to make any appropriations pur-
suant to that chapter in It's present condi-
ton is therefore. in my judgment, unwse
and unJustifable.
wish to be understood questioning the liza
bility of the state for the payment of the
| bounty already accrued. To this extent the
state is bound morally and legally, but pub
| lie interest and the safety of the treasury in
my judgment demand that any bill enacted
by the legislature for the purpose Of carry
Ing out the provisions OF chapter 205 of the
| General Laws of 1895 should also contain
clear and explicit limitations to tho ag
gregate liability that the taxpayers of the
state may incur hereunder.
I therefore constrained to return here
| with to the house of representatives H. F.
1863 without my signature. l do this with less
hesitancy, as there is ample time at this
early period of the session for the legisla-
| ture to make proper provisions for the safe
ty of the treasury, either by the repeal of
chapter 205 or by limiting it's operations as
suggested, and at the same time appropriate
the funds to pay the claims accrued under
| it to date.
Former Senator Theden, who has
been holding forth at the capitol since
the bill was first introduced. was much
surprised at the message Of Gov. Lind.
Asked as to what action would be TAX
en- by those interested Mr.. Theden said
the bill would be passed over the gov
errors veto. Whether he knows re-
| he