Carson daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1873-1877, 1877-02-14
MINING TAX.


Under the Constitution the mines
which constitute the chief property OF
this State, and which amount in value to
more than one hundred and fifty millions
Of dollars. and which are almost entirely
| owned and controlled by foreign corpor-
atoms a'e exempt from the payment of
t..x,s. Other property amounting in
vains to 40 more than thirty millions
If do'-s and owned chiefly by resi-
lens If the State is annually taxed to
su?pc". the Government. Thus the
burdens Of taxation. always onerous, are
uade exceptionally SO by a descrimin-
alton " aich has no foundation in Justice
no support in reason and no precedent
II Governments and which had its origin
aud consummatiOn in the greed of
ae corporations and servility of those
VIC made the law. The Constitution.
exemp'ing the mine. requires the pro-
ceeds to be taxed not part bit all the pro
eeeds. Yetthe power of the corporations
and their agents has been sufficiently
great to secure the exemption OF con-
siderable part of that which the Consti-
tuition requires shall be taxed and which
the Courts have decided is the Just sub
ject of taxation. In place of taxing the
ore a, its value. the cost of producing it
is deducted. principal applicable to no
other property. and by which nearly one
half the ore escapes taxation. The
farmer who produces grain is allowed
nothing for seed or labor the
grain is taxed at its value without deduc
ton. The mechanic whose skill has
wrought wood and metal into articles Of
value is allowed nothing for his labor or
the cost of material. His production is
taxed at its value when completed. The
merchant is taxed for the value of his
with out deductions for cost.
What justice is there in applying a
different rule to the owners of ore taken
from the mines? The farmer, the
mechanic and the merchant are taxed
each year so long as the product remains
on hand. The mine owner never pays
taxes on his ore but once and pays that
only after the bullion is extracted. To
demonstrate the inequality of taxation
" indubitable facts: In 1875 the value |
ia I
md proceeds) was more than one hun
lred and fifty millions of dollars. The |
'alue of all other property was less than
hirty millions of dollars. In that year
he mine owners paid less than $780,
100 taxes and the owners of other prop
r,y more than $S50,000. Thus it is
hown tn 1t other property paid one dol
sr on each thirty-five of valuation
'hile the mines paid one dollar on each
* hundred of valuation the mine
wner only paid one seventeent b
art as much tax in proportion to the
alue of his property as did other tax
ayers.
Putting the body of the mine
ut of the question. In 1875 the gross
Ield of the mines was more than thirty
Tree millions of dollars. The total tax
aid on which was less than two hun
red and fifty thousand dollars. The
tal value of all other property was less
ian thirty millions. The tax paid on
hich was more than eight hundred and
ty thousand dollars. showing that other
'operty paid nearly four times as much
Y in proportion to value as the pro-
eds of the mines. 1t is fundamen
principle in the economy of all just
that taxation shall be equal
ID the wealth of the country bear the
rdens of the State. In Nevada alone
all the American States has this prin-
Die been reversed. Here inequality is
e rule. Here the wealth of the State
exempt and the burden of
iation is cast upon the poor. Surely !
equality in taxation is that which is
light it will not be attained by further n,
the proceeds of the mines.
ROBERT NJ. CLARKE. v