St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-08-30

able this great corporation to escape
taxation. That this law was uuconsti-
tutional, there is not the slightest
doubt. The Minnesota Iron company,
however, was satisfied with the law,
and, being the only party that could
have the law set aside, for obvious rea-
sons made no objection, and regularly
paid this one cent per ton to the state.
Up to the year 1892 the highest sum
paid into the state treasury in any one
year by the Minnesota Iron company
was tritie over $1,000. Had this cor
poratlOn been taxed as the people of the
state generally are taxed, instead of
$1,000 it would have been obliged to
contribute at the lowest estimate $780,
600.
Is it any wonder that the Minnesota
Iron company was satisfied with the l.
cent a ton rate on the output of its
mines?
With view to placing this great cor
poration on the same level as all other
property owners i'll the state, Senator
Leavitt, OF Nj Meeker county, early in the
session of 1891 introduced bill repeal
ing the law of 1881. This bill, which
was labeled Senate File ii, follows:
bill for an act to repeal chapter fifty. four
(5D of the General Laws of extra session
of A. d. one thousand eight hundred and
eighty-one t1ssD, entitled, IAN act to en-
courage mining in this state by providing a
uniform rule for the taxing of mining
property and products
Be it enacted by the legislature of the state
of Minnesota.
Section !. That chapter ffty-four go of
the General Laws of the extra session of A.
d. one thousand eight hundred and eighty
one QSSD, eutitled, AN act TO encourage
mining in this state by providing q uniform
rule for the taxing of mining property and
6trat ,tr.y
ond (s2d), A. D.. one thousand eight hundred
and eighty-one QSSD, be and the same is
hereby repealed.
This bill came up in the senate on
April 10, and was debated at grea
length, one of the leaders of the opposi
ton to the measure being Senator
Tawney. The iron company's at
lobbying against the measure dur
been their intense loyalty to
Senator Davis that led the Winona SEN
ator and nearly all the Republican
members to do so, but whatever may
have been their motives the fact re-
mains that the records show that Sen
ators Hammer. of Fillmore; Stevens, of
Ramsey; Burkhardt, of Wabasha. and
StreiSSguth, of Sibley,were the only Re-
puDlicans who voted to tax this wealthy
corporation on the property it owns. the
same as the farmers of the state are
taxed. The senate journal of that day
is interesting. A part of it follows:
On motion of Mr. Sanborn, the senate
resolved itself into committee of the
whole.
Mr.. MeHale in the chair.
After some time spent therein the
committee rose and reported that it had
had under consideration S. F. No. Al,
repeating law taxing mining products.
" hich it reported back with the rec
concentration that the bill be indie finite
ly postponed.
MIR. Daugherty moved that the report
of the committee be adopted.
Mr.. Leayitt moved all amendment
that the report of the committee of the
whole be so amended as to recommend
S. L. No. Al to pass.
An amendment was offered as fol-
lows:
Amend section by striking out the
word repealed" OH the fourth line and
insert in lieu thereof the following:
Amended by striking out the words and
figures lone Q cent" OH the thirteenth
and fourteenth lines of section l of
said act and inserting in lieu thereof the
words and figures five (0 cents"
Amend the title by striking out the
word repeal on the first line thereof
and insert the word amend"
And the roll being called there were
ayes 20 and nays "a.
Senator Tawney voted aye, as did all
the friends of the iron company.
This would increase the taxes of the
company, but the increase was more to
their liking than to be assessed and
taxed Oh all their property.
The npyt move of the OnDnSifiop, fo
the bill was to offer an amendment fix
ing the tax at four cents per ton i'll
stead of one cent.
Senator Tawney voted aye.
But the amendment was defeated by
a vote of % to %, and Senator Leavitt's
motion that the bill be recommended to
pass was adopted by "a ayes and %
nays.
Senator Tawney voted no.
On Saturday, April IL. Senator Leav-
tits bill came up on a motion made
by Gen. Sanborn to reconsider the vote
by which it was recommended to pass.
reconsider was adopted by % ayes to II
nays.
Senator Tawney voted aye.
Senator Bell wanted the tax fixed at
AZ cents ton, and offered an amend
ment to that effect. which was voted
down, the iron company evidently hav-
ing given notice that this amount was
too high. This time Senator Tawney
voted no. He had on the day before
voted to fix the rate first at five cents per
ton, and later OIL the same day to fix it
at four cents. The reasons for this
change were made manifest few
minutes later when Mr.. Tawney offered
the following amendment:
Armand nf No Al H.,
striking out the word repealed" on the
fourth line and insert in lieu thereof the
following: Amended by striking out
the words and figures tone ~ cent" on
the thirteenth and fourteenth lines of
section L of said act and inserting in lieu
thereof the words and figures three 81
cents" Amend the title by striking
out the word repeal OH the first line
OF S. f. No. Al and insert the word
'amend."
And the roll being called, there were
ayes 90 and nays Is.
Senator Tawney voted aye.
In this shape the bill was passed on
April Is by avote of % ayes to 10 NAYS.
Senator Tawney vote aye.
Another important measure that failed
to receive the support of Senator Taw-
Hey was Senator Sevatsen's bill, S. f.
275. fixing the liability of common
carriers and regulating the manner of
establishing the same" The bill was
omprehensive, and was designed to
help out the small shippers who are
driven out of business because of the
fact that there is usually great dis
crepancy between the weight of car of
grain at the shipping points and the
terminal points.
Senator Sevatson's bill simply pro-
sided that the railroads mustdeliYer the