Reporter and farmer. [volume] (Webster, Day County, Dakota [S.D.]) 188?-1946, 1892-05-05

u -
al tax 80, mills; Inst. Territorial
bonds 6 total AS mills" That
computed on . valuation Of $444,
amounts to t?.00. Your receipt
for 1890 reads, "TerritorIal tar 2
mills ~Interest Territorial bonds A
total tax IA, which computed on
the valuation of Sal, amounts to
81. rs or % cents less than on $444,
in 1889. "Now honest reader de-
eide for yourself whether or not the
assertion was literally true;" As
the State, arethe only taxes affected,
any action Of the State Board, it
shows a decrease of % cents accord
ing to Mr.. Aliens receipts, instead
of being "almost doubled as Mr..
Loucks claimed.
You again say: "If the article
did not try to make out the high
taxes Of 1889, we're not due to the
the Independent Party, the article
simply amounts to nothing at all
Ii that is true, why did you write
so much in yonr second article try
ing to disprove the facts set forth
in my first? Both articles have
clearly demonstrated that it is a
very small part of u taxes that
we q charge up to any of the pc
liticsl paroles, and the largest por-
ton of them are levied in the
townships and for the townships.
As far rs | know, there has been
no party issues in the townships,
and hence no party can be blamed
for the taxes in question.
You further say: eyes it was
intended solely and entirely AS a
mean drive at the Independents,
but it fell wide of the mark; and
his denial in the second, only shows
to what extremities some will go
when thoroughly cornered." is
stating facts connected with u
taxes, "a mean drive at the indie
p~endents!" II so, why? In the
last sentence quoted, you speak
from experience | suppose, your ref
erence to receipts Nos. 2l46 and o.
l53 is very suggestive of that fact.
viii you explain how and when
| was so thoroughly cornered,'
when | Was preparing that speech'
| am aware that you have been try
ing to get me IN a corner since that
article appeared IN the REPORTER,
with what C is very well
known. Ityou are satisfied, | am.
Yonr statement that the increase of
population els due, first, to the
natural law OF increa te, second, to
the foreign immigration;" is cor
rect. Also as to why foreigners
come here: at is because this is
supposed to be . free country, and
that free homes can be secured
here" That Is a tact Mr.. A.; but
it occurs to me that your claim
'.thst no party is responsible for
the increase of population;" "a u
little off, since you say free homes
is cause; and you, holding the
Office of Superintendent Of Schools
Of Day County, must certainly
know that the law giving free
homes to actual settlers, was en-
acted by a Republican Congsess and
approved by a Republican presi-
dent in 1862, after the Republican
party had made FREQ homes a Ma
tioEal issue in 1856, 1T n before
the people until it waE an accom-
plished fact. 1t failed in the Sen
ate once by a vote Of the Vice
President, and in 1860 the law was
vetoed by the President; but when
the Republican Party gained full
control it became the law of the
land, since which time, according
to the latest ststistics that | have,
ever one million homesteads have
been bestowed upon persons who
might otherwise have been without
land. Therefore the act of the
Republican party has stimulated
immigration, and hence increased
the population. You claim that
mine out Of ten know nothing
about political administrator when
they arrive mere" Bless Inc how
ignorant they must be, those poor
foreigners; ''but now they do begin
to find out, they invariably go into
the Independent Party;" is that
what the Independent Party Is
made mp ofs simply a few self can
didsted landars and Sfnipe ont of
ten that "know nothing OF Polit-
ica' administration? but now they
do begin to find OUT" queer post.
lou that.
Your answer with ~Eeisrepce to
the increased population in cities
is remarkable. You say: "Because
the oppression of unjust laws ltbe