name and style of “The First Division of the St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company.” To this new company was transferred the “main line” from St. Paul to Breckenridge and the “branch” from St. Anthony to St. Cloud. The early building of these lines within the bounds of civilization would not, it was believed, appear a romantic undertaking to investors. The scheme had its intended effect. Money poured in galore. When the “branch” was finished to St. Cloud in 1866 (76 miles), $7,000,000 of bonds had been sold. That amount of cash would have built 350 miles of road, as roads were then built in level regions. Five years later (1871) the “main line” reached the Red River at Breckenridge (217 miles), and the bond issue had been swelled to $13,500,000. The two lines might have been built for much less than half as many dollars. Upon the completion of the main line and branch it was believed to be feasible and judicious to go on with the construction of the remaining mileage retained by the original St. Paul and Pacific Company. This consisted of the so-called “extensions”: the “St. Vincent Extension,” from St. Cloud to the Canada line on the Red River, and the trifling “Brainerd Extension,” from St. Cloud to Crow Wing. To build these a loan of $15,000,000 was obtained in Holland. The bonds were placed at seventy-five cents on the dollar, and twenty-one per cent. of the proceeds were retained to meet three years’ interest. These discounts left a little short of $9,000,000 in available cash. This amount would have built and equipped both the extensions (about 470 miles) according to the building standards of the time. In November, 1872, the money was all gone and there had been built 140 miles of road, 100 miles having no connection with the existing portions of the system. Collections of rails, ties, and bridge material, not actually paid for, remained on hand, a useless asset. In his message to the legislature of 1873 Governor Austin characterized the finance of the companies by implication as injudicious and dishonest, and vaguely suggested that the just claims of the foreigners should be consulted. The lawmakers, however, were disposed to allow the foreign investors, who had placed their funds according to their own judgment, to use their own wits to recover their losses. It is difficult to see what relief the legislature could lawfully have rendered.