The Ely miner. [volume] (Ely, Minn.) 1895-1986, 1935-10-31
Minnesota NelUs and
Comment
BY R. w. HITCHCOCK

A group of sincere but willful con-
servationiSts, centering their activities
in Minneapolis, effectually hamStrung
conservation in Minnesota in the winter
of 1898. For the mess ives in" in con-
servation, they are largely responsible.
Impotence itself created in the Game
and Fish Department and its Shrill
squabbling over the controverted pro-
posaI to turn Minnesota state forests
over to the federal government are
simply the most recent developments
which have Stigmatized the conserva-
ton setup from it's beginning as hot
bed of petty politics.
At the legislative session of 1888 the
Public Domain Committee of the House,
materially aided by the Minnesota
American Legion, drafted the present
Minnesota conservation act. The bill,
however, differed from the present law
in that it placed complete control Of
and authority over conservation in Min
nesota in the hands of single con-
Servation commissioner.
Here is where the willfuI group of
earnest conservationiSts in Minneapolis
did their dirty work. They lobbied Wig
orously for a commission instead Of a
single commissioner, demanding a COM
mission of seven or nine members. They
openly threatened to defeat all con-
servation legislation unless their pet
scheme, a large conservation commission
was written into the act. They failed
to amend the bill to meet their wishes;
whereupon they made good upon their
threat by turning upon the bill and de-
feating it. The truer friends of con-
seryation, although graVely doubling
the wisdom of a commission, then sur
rendered; the bill was revived, COM
mission of five members was agreed
upon, and the original bill, so amended,
became the present law.
It was the contention of the pro-
ponents Of a single commissioner,
clothed with complete conservation
powers, that a commission control
would be far more likely to invite
political chickering's and disappointments
for conservation in Minnesota. Their
fears have been fully realized. The
thirty months administration of the
conservation act under the commission
Set-up has been sorry exhibition of
uncertain policy, petty quarrelling and
political intrigues. The commissioner
Of conservation, who should be in a
position to formulate and put into ef-
feet broad-visioned policies of conserva-
ton, is mere figurehead with tightly
tied hands, and the entire department,
for which such high hopes were enter
tanned, is an offense in the noStrils of
the people CT The state.
It is not true that the willful con-
servationists Of 1888 are wholly re-
Sponsible for the miserable mess that
conservation is in today in Minnesota
Their rule or ruin policy is largely re-
sponsible, but the determination of the
present state administration to make
the government of the state pay large
partisan political dividends is also re-
Sponsible.
The 1888 fight over a conservation
commissioner as opposed to commits
sion control had its prototype in 1921 in
the strenuous struggle over the high
way act. After repeated assaults from
the advocates of an unwieldy commits
sion Set-up, the single commissioner
control finally prevailed in the estab-
hshment of Minnesota's new state trunk
highway system. The wisdom of that
decision was amply demonstrated
through the long and able administra-
ton of the Highway Department by
Commissioner Babcock when there was
no interference from the executive. It
was only upon executive interference
for personal and partisan political pro-
1T that the efficiency of the department
was undermined and corrupted, until
today, Notwithstanding personally
able head in Commissioner Elsberg, it
has become byword and a kissing in
Minnesota.
Any governmental function will fail
if the people entrust its administration
to those whose chief thought is parts
anship, but the Minneapolis conserva-
ton zealots of 1898 set the stage them
selves for sure and swift breakdown
of the conservation act.
When Harper Sibley, president of the
United States Chamber of Commerce,
came to Minneapolis last week to make
a number of addresses he was sort of
coming home, for his grandfather was
a cousin of Henry II. Sibley, man-sized
pioneer of Minnesota, Indian fighter,
congressman and statesman, and first
governor of the state.
Naturally President Harper Sibley
went out to Mendoza to have look at
the famed Sibley house where his far
removed cousin lived in the Indian
fighting days of Minnesota. The Sibley
house is today a Minnesota shrine.
Last month September 28th) Be-
heve-I Ripley took notice of
this Minnesota shrine and reminded US
that Henry II. Sibley's six children were
all born in one room Of the Sibley
house, but nevertheless in six different
states-Michigan Wisconsin, Iowa,
North and South Dakota and Mime
sota-for all Of these states were a part
of the famous Northwest Territory"
and, at different times, a part of the
area which is now Minnesota.
Incidentally, cousin Sibley represents
a great organization with headquarters
in Washington and with more than a
million individual members. The posi-
ton Of the United States Chamber of