The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1904-09-22

4
in it whatever show he had of either to
begin with.-Pioneer Press.
The Van SAINT Campaign Against Dunn.
The answer of Mr.. Dunn to the
charges of the public examiner covers
every point in the long campaign
aginst him made by that functionary
under Governor Van SAINTS order.
1t is too long to read except under
compulsion. We may be pardoned for
giving pretty full outline. The
Tribune has not been partisan in
this matter, and persons not them
selves prejudiced will not think our
outline colored. Ia. = ~. ~. III,
The charges OF Mr.. johnson showed
under examination all the earmarks
OF an investigation inspired by malice
with prejudged conclusion. When
Dunn became State auditor in 1895
the cutting Of timber on State lands
was undergoing transition from the
looseness and extravaganza of his
predecessors to the comparative order
in which he left it. Stumpage was
cheap then and it had been the Gus
tom to take out permits on specula-
ton, make small advances and hold
them without any cutting. Many such
were in existence when he came into
Office. In the course of his eight
years. service most of these were an
nulled or settled under the best terms
that could be got and new permits
given at a much higher rate with
strict time limit on the use of them.
All but about half dozen of the
charges of failure to get for the State
the whole value of timber cut on it's
lands are these old cases. In many
of them the loss to the State is purely
imaginary. In his ignorance of the
technicalities of the lumber business.
his inability to comprehend the &C.
counts Of the auditors Office, and his
eager desire to earn the approval of
Governor Van SAINT and the promised
reward OF the Minneapolis city treas
ureship by smirching Dunn, Mr.. John
son fails into absurd errors.
He charges the auditors Office with
timber burned in the Hinckley fire,
with timber that is still standing. with
timber that never existed except on
wrong surveys. These errors might
be honestly made in a routine investi-
cation, made under compulsion of
law by a man ignorant of the subject
under his hand. But they must be at
tributed to personal malice on Mr..
Johnson's part, or crawling servility
to the. malice of his superior, the gov
ernor, in an inquiry undertaken with
out public necessity in the heat of a
political campaign.
Observe in connection with this that
the legislative committee two years
ago found nothing to condemn in the
management of these old cases: that
the attorney general has steadily re-
fused to begin court proceedings on
the charges of the public examiner,
and that the present auditor confirms
in most positive way the legal and
moral regularity of his predecessors
settlements. Indeed, it seems to US
that the most convincing part OF the
long statement printed yesterday is
that contributed by Mr.. Iverson. It
is free from the heat and fury of
Dunn's personal reply to johnson.
It is cold, hard evidence, from official
records. disproving in detail every
charge of violation of law or neglect
of the public interest. -
g g g
The present auditor does not deal
with the new charge Of the public ex-
aminer in connection with mineral
leases, although his explanation of
the old manner of issuing pine land
permits throws some light upon it.
1t is necessary to crystalline evidence
on this point out Of the fire of Mr..
Dunn's natural and generous rage.
lt.is still the custom, it appears. to |
take out mineral leases on specula-
ton, abandon them if worthless and |
sell or work them if valuable. There
is nothing in the State land records |
to show the value of land supposed to
be mineral. Lessees take them on
their own judgment and bid accord
ingly. @
There is no legal or moral reason,