Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1892-02-24
PAYING UNDER, PROTEST.
Tax on Logs That VIII Bring on Hot
Litigation.

Litigation.
MADISON, Wis, Feb. 20.-There is
prospect of trouble in the collection of
the license fee which the legislature of
1891 decided should be paid by boom
companies into the state treasury. By
this act, Chapter 422 of the Laws of
1891, every corporation, company or
person operating or controlling in whole
or IN part any dam, boom, sluIce-way
or other structure in any navigable
stream or waters, situated within or
forming part of the boundary line Of
this state, used for the purposes of
storing, sluicing, booming, brailing or
driving saw logs or other timber, shall
make an annual statement to the state
treasurer within ten days after February
/. This annual statement must contain 2
verified report Of the gross earnings of
the corporation or person on account of
the boom, sluice-Way or structure used
for the aforementioned purpose. At
the same time there must be paid into
the state treasury license of per cent.
of these gross earnings. If this license
fee is not paid the owners of the boom
or siuiceway are to forfeit al rights,
privileges and franchises granted by the
legislature to them, and the attorney
general is authorized to institute pro-
ceedings looking to the forfeiture of
the charter.
This 2 per cent. license fee is the
same as is paid by railroads operating
within the state, and as the booming
and logging companies make vast sums
of money annually, because Of valuable
franchises obtained from the state, it
was deemed no more than proper that
they pay fair percentage to the state.
But these corporations do not seem to
fall in with the idea, and are preparing
to resist, in the courts If necessary, the
right of the state to collect. Some OF
them have made reports, although reg
istering at the same time they depos-
tied their license money a solemn pro-
test which will help them get back their
money if the state loses the suits,
which it is believed are sue to come.
The principal ground cf objection is
the claim that the law is violation OF
the United States constitution respect
ing commerce. The booming compa-
MES claim that the law IS an interior
ence OF commerce; that all the streams
are navigahle waters and TO levy d tax
upon the business transacted thereupOn
NOulQ D0 Illegal. 11S 4uItASI CIeblLA -
made that the waters all have direct
connection with other states, and thus
the interstate CONNER ce is interfered
with. The refusal Of the companies to
pay their licenses will doubtless lead to
a motion for an annulment of their
charters made by the attorney general
in the supreme court, though he said
he had not got further than a beginning
of an investigation into the matter as
yet when questioned to-day.
A very peculiar case IS that Of Mar
inette company which is operating
upon stream which begins in Wiscon-
sin and flows into Northern Michigan.
This stream is neither within the state
nor forming part of the boundary
line, and it is questioned whether the
company, which operates on both sides
of the boundary, can be made to pay.
Besides, the company says 1t is practi-
cally impossible for it to determine
what part of its gross earnings belong
to the Wisconsin side and which to the
Michigan. However, ii will be neces-
sarv for them to devise some way by
which their earnings can be accurately
apportioned, as the railroads have. for
instance, if the law is held valid.
4 sharp fight is expected because the
booming companies are wealthy and
will do everything possible to secure a
reversal of q law which compels them
to disgorge part of their earnings.