Morris tribune., 1908-10-31
]. (. JACOBSON AND DRAINAGE
Repnblicaa Nominee for Governor Has
Always Stood for Drainage and De-
velopment of Waste Lands.

The Democratic state central COM
mittee has published and circulated
quite generally throughout the state
pamphlet violently assailing Mr.. Ja-
cobson's record on drainage legisla'
tion. AS usual, they have distorted
and misstated the facts.
The statement is true that Mr.. Ja-
cobson voted against Senate File No.
Eli, which was general drainage act
but IL the Democratic committee had
intended to be at all fair II would have
stated in its pamphlet that Gov. JonFi.
cen, when he was state senator, also
vsted against the same measure. (Seo
Senate Journal, page 594, March ia
1S9s.) The only difference between
the record OF Representative Jacobs0n
and that Of Senator johnson is that
Mr.. Jacobson had the courage to state
his objections to the measure, while
Gov Johnson, following his usual pol.
Icy OF evasion, has remained silenet I
upon the subject to this day. We call
attention to this willful omission on
the part of the opposition only to show
that 1t has no disposition to treat MIR.
Jacobson fairly in this or in any OF the
other criticism which has been aimed
ut this greatest friend the people OF
Minnesota ever had in the state legiS-
lature.
Mr. Jacobson's objection to this
measure was that the members Of the
legislature from the north, who were :
in favor Of this bill, thought it neces-
sary to go into combination with
other members of the legislature who
sought to TAXI ->=s>e $2,000,000 from
the state treasury for other purposes
than drainage.
The friends of the drainage meas
ure, which was a good one, have long
since seen their mistake, and are now
willing to admit it.
Two years later when House File
No. 1871 was introduced, MIR. Jacobson =
worked for and voted for the measure,
because it stood upon it's own merits,
and it's supporters had not entered in
to any entangling alliances with other
interests, and the bill became a law.
This is the present drainage law Of
Minnesota. In this matter the Demo-
Gratis also failed to make mention or
Mr.. Jacobson's support, again shoWIn9'''
a studied design upon their part to
misrepresent the present Republican
candidate for governor. The defeat OF
the measure in 1899 did not kill the
policy of drainage, but simply delayed
the enactment of the law for tive
years. Mr. Jacobson believed, and all
fair-minded men who have taken pains
to look into the matter agree with him,
that the defeat of the 1899 bill was
absolutely necessary in order that
other rights of the people might be
protected.
At the time when the first drainagassl
bill was under consideration, Mr.. ia.
cobson had his eye on the state treas
ury, and was not willing to allow the
interests Of the people to be sacrificed
at the hands of any combination, and
he notified the friends of drainage in
advance that if they did not desist in
their support of these other combina-
tions he would defeat the entire plan
because he felt Obliged to do so. He
did defeat the whole coordination, and j.
this is the only time that Mr.. Jacob
SON has been known to lift his voics
against any drainage measure Of gen.
eral application.
OF course, innumerable bills have
been introduced from time to time In
the legislature during Mr. Jacobson's
long term of service, which called for. y
the drainage Of some particular spot
or territory, and which would often be
the pet measure OF some private land
owner or owners rather than one of
general benefit. AS to these measures,
Mr.. Jacobson was always known to
care for the interests of the general
public rather than for the pocketbook
of some individual who sought to use
the peoples money for his own private
end, and in SO doing he performed
greater service for the real friends OF
drainage and state development than J,
could have been done by supporting
the pet measures that were intro N
duced.
Mr.. Jacobson did not uphold the
drainage Of one county at the expense
Of another, nor did he believe in tax
ing the smaller land owners for the
purpose of improving the lands Of
spectators and railroads.
It is hoped that every real friend of
drainage will study carefully the rec
ord Of Mr.. Jacobson on this subject,
and not be missed by deceitful repre-
sentations of unscrupulous politicians.
One can readily see from what has
pose and design of sending out pamph.es1sr
lets which do not tell the whole
truth is to mislead the voters.
When the idea of draining, develops
ing and reclaiming public lands In
Northern Minnesota came first to be
recognized as a sound policy, the
arge SPECTATORS tried for few years
10 get their hands into the state treas
lry, and would have succeeded in 90
doing had it not been for the watch
'ulness of Mr.. Jacobson, who was al
ways able to detect the difference he
,ween a genuine drainage act and
bill to benefit only special interests at
he expense of the people.
We can think of no better ilIustra-
ion of the great benefit that Mr.. Ia
,obson has been to the people of the
state than to call attention to the cir
,ular OF Misrepresentation which tbs
opposition has put out, wherein 1t il