The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1904-09-30

| place, and the cost to the state was $500
| in expenses in addition to the loss above
mentioned.
In 1900 an extremely aggravated case
| of trespass in Aitkin county was brought
to my attention. | was very careful to
comply with the strict terms of the law
the same for SALE At the outset Mr. T..
r. Foley of Aitkin, who had furnished
the supplies to the trespassers. and was
interested only to the amount of the mer-
chandise he had furnished to the tres
! passers, and was in no way connected
with the trespass, offered me $500 in
have said, proceeded to comply with the
strict terms of the law. The best bid I
which was offered by A.. Y. Merrill of
Minneapolis, and veg obliged to sell for.
that sum. The state would have been
offer, besides the expenses which amount
ed to about $500 more. could cite sew
eral instances of this kind.
were only two unsettled cases of tres
pass. One of my last official acts was
to write the attorney general caustic
letter urging him to commence action
at once against one of the parties, g
Minneapolis lumberman. But find that
no action was commenced until about
two months ago and Mr.. Johnson was
given the credit for having the suit In
Stituted.
Court Gives the 'aiea'<are of Dam-
In this connection I refer to the State
of Minnesota VS.. Shevlin & Carpenter.
81 MINI. 99-109 inclusive. where Chief
court has adopted and repeatedly applied
the following rule in actions of trespass
in, trover: where the defendant is a
ages is the full value of the property at
the time and place of demand. but if
he is only an unintentional or mistaken
trespasser-that is where he honestly and
reasonably believed that he had the legal
right to take the property-then the
measure of damages is the value of the
property at the time and place, and in
the condition it was taken.'''
During the eight years served as
auditor, the first four years the price of
knows that there was depression in the
lumber business in the years 1895. 1896,
1897 and 1898. In the eight years I held
six general sales of timber, held no
sales in 1896 and 1899. and the amount
derived from those six sales, including
the outstanding permits, was S2,257,O00.
while in all the previous history of the
state ten times more timber was sold
or disappeared from view and only ST.
s40.992 was realized. | think the figures
quoted amply demonstrate and prove to
the satisfaction of all fair-minded men :,
that the timber interests of the state
were not neglected during my admins
that had the states timber been ham
died as well prior to my administration
as during my administration, the per-
manent school and the permanent univer-
sity funds would be at least five million
dollars larger than they now are.
Pine Land Investigating Committees
Work.
The state legislature of 1899 appointed
pine land investigating committee for
the special purpose of investigating all
state timber stumpage transactions
which had taken place prior to 1895 and
provided it with a fund for the purpose
of employing cruisers and defraying eX-
mittee covered the field thoroughly.
which it undoubtedly did. Any reflec-
tons which the public examiner may
cast. upon any timber transaction oc-
curing prior to 1895 falls with more
force Upon this pine land investigating
committee than upon R. c. Dunn.
above committee are as follows: Hon.
Ignatius Donnelly, Hon. S. w. Leavett,
Hon. A. Y. Eaton, Hon. c. F. Staples,
Hon. J. F. Jacobson and Hon. M. ]. Nc :
Grath.
The law of 1895 (Chapter 1es G. L.
1880 specially provided that al timber
estimates made prior to the passage Of
the bill were null and void This made
it impossible for me to pay much atten-
ton to old matters as the appropriation
made for the purpose by the legislature
only admitted of the state auditor en-
ploying three cruisers In the field and
they were necessarily kept busy looking
permits then in force. But where the
state auditor learned of old cases where
cuttings had not been paid for, the facts
were noted and wherever evidence could
be secured collections were made.
AS a matter of fact there are very
few cases to which the public examiner
calls attention, where there is the slight
est grounds for criticism His report Is
the most reckless and misleading collec-
lie official His gross. misinterpretation
of such terms as New cuttings" re-
ported by the cruisers, which he cons
strueS to mean that cutting was made
of state timber and follows with the in
quiry why the cutting reported was
not paid for?'' and the similar construc-
ho nj nm hn nfsrJac N11f ell
around" "cut on south and east side,''
which also leads him to inquire why this
cutting was not paid for for. indicates his
which he presumes to sit in Judgment.
Any person possessing but a slight
knowledge of the lumber business could
have informed him that the term new
cutting" means that the timber never
was cut into. and that cuttings on east
means that the timber on lands adioin-
ing the state lands had been cut and
that in consequence the state timber
was in danger of fire originating in the
'slashings' on these adjoining lands.
Johnson's Rot About bark Marks.
In one of his former reports Mr. John
son makes a great ado over the fact that
bark marks were not contained in sever-
al of the permits when the same were
recorded in the state auditors office. All
| have to say in reply is that a lumber
man who would dump his logs into a
stream or lake without properly marking
the same would be a fit subject for
common sense could the logs be identified
at the boom il they were not properly
marked? The letters MIN must be
stamped on all logs cut on state lands
and as matter of self protection. liz for
no other reason, the owner must af1x
some other mark to enable him to dis
tinguish and claim his property.
1t has been asserted that ought to
have asked the legislature for an addi-
do to hold the appropriation at $4,000.
to say nothing about increasing it. Out
of that $4,000 we had to pay for apprais-
ing, advertising and selling state lands,
caring for the mineral output and pro-
tecting the states timber.
When Mr.. Johnson's first report was
turned over to Attorney General Douglas.
and that conscientious official was urged
by both the governor and the PUBLIC ex-
informed that Mr.. Douglas said there
was nothing in Johnscn's report to base
an action on. might say more on this
subject, but will forbear for the present.
During my administration I exercised
every care to protect the states timber
and realized the highest prices obtain
able, and never sold stick of timber
No Partially was shown any man or
firm by me. treated all alike. That
mistakes and errors of judgment were
made will not deny, but reiterate that
in every instance acted for the best in.
! terests of the state according to the best
| of my knowledge and belief. Every dol
| lar collected for trespass, whether it was
two dollars or eleven thousand dollars,
| is accounted for and was paid into the
| state treasury, and no attempt was made
| to cover up or conceal any transaction,
| and the records of the Office were always