The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1911-02-09

lCETON, MILE Laos COUNT
bers. The vote on this resolution
was 81 for and % against.
!. + !.
An investigation made subsequent
to the vote shows that, according to
the present population of the state,
the senators who voted for the resolu-
tion represented 1879, 492 inhabitants
of the state, while those who voted
against the resolution and defeated it
represented but 723,O26 inhabitants of
the state. This indicates that the ma
jority of the people are represented by
a minority of senators. a condition
which no fair-minded man would wish
to see perpetuated. 1t has also been
pointed out that the assessed valu-
alton of the districts represented by q
minority of the senator's is 1895, 49,
532, while the valuation of the dis
tricts represented by the majority of
the senators voting against reappor-
tionment is 1913, ISL, 22O. However,
men govern in this state, or should,
and not mere wealth. To concede
anything else would be to take the
government of the state from the
people and to turn it over to the
special interests. -...-.--
I understand that since this vote
was announced there is irresponsible
talk among the more volatile of those
who favor reapportionment of dividing
the state. This, of course, is simply
silly. Minnesota IS boundaries are
now fixed. They will not be lightly
changed.
The deadly nature of the corn
shredder has been brought to the
notice of the legislature. There is
probably no machine in use any where
whose operation is attended with SO
great danger to life and limb. The
number of people in this state who
have been MANNED by corn shredders
can be counted by hundreds if not by
thousands. Kerry Conley's~ bill re-
quires all corn shredders sold or
operated to be provided, with reason
able safety devices and to be in
charge of some one skilled in their
use.
A resolution slipped through the
slim house Monday morning, pos
sibly without sufficient consideration,
certainly without debate, calling on
the 4atate'& representations in congress-
to support parcels post law. The
resolutionwas offered by Mr.. Hop
kins of Renville county, and the
reason given in it for favoripg the
parcels post law was that express
charges are excessive. From the
standing vote taken one would Judge
that q parcels post is favored bv
farmer members on the one hand and
city members on the other, and that.
the opposition to it comes from the
members who represent the views of
country merchants. And here I NAV
remark that there are those who think
that country merchants who oppose
the parcels post are standing in their
own light. While parcels post law
might at first appear to favor the mail
order houses, the extension of the
rural delivery system makes it pos
sible for the country merchant to take
the first advantage of it. This would
OF course involve his paying more
attention to the advertising end of his
business which he is prone to neglect,
but the country newspaper offers him
a medium for getting next to his GUS
toners more frequently and more
effectively than the mail order house
can through its bulky catalogues.
Even from the stand point of the
country merchant it is claimed that
the parcels post question is not alto
gether one-sided. At all events II
would be poor policy on the part of
the merchant to set his face against a
system of cheap transportation which
majority of his customers favor.
The twin city jobbers, millers and
manufacturers have during the past
week made furious onslaught on the
eastman distance tariff bill, which
was natural enough, as it's design is
to put country jobbers, millers and
manufacturers on an equal footing
with them. With the exception of Mr..
Lorlng of the Pi]lsbury- ashburn
mills who candidly confessed the view
that merchant milling in the country
is lmpracticable, and that Mime
apolls ought of right to monopoIize
this industry, the argument was