The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-03-14
A DEAD BAD BILL.

Among the bills vetoed by the Gov
|ernor was H. B. lat, to exempt certain
manufacturing interests from taxation.
1t was a very sweeping S;ece of class
legislation. That it's full purport may
be understood we here insert it's full
text:
Section 1. That all real and personal
property of every description, including
buildings, machinery necessary for and
used in the establishment and opera
ton of, and all manufactured articles,
lin the hands of every manufacturer of
every paper, hat, brush, white lead
starch, candle, porcelain, vitrified pipe,
tile. glass mandatory, and every sill
yer refining, zinc. Sunderland star met
al and anthony works, and every man
.ufactory of soda, sulphuric acid, chlor-
inc gas, Portland cement and each of
the compounds of soda, hydrochloric
acid and chlorine gas, and all coke
ovens making coke from Utah coal and
all iron and steel works using Utah
iron ore, and all manufactures for
dressing, saving and polishing Utah
onyx, if used exclusively on Utah onyx
and marble, established within two
years from the date of the passage of
this act, shall be exempt from all ter
rltoriai, school, county and municipal
taxes for the period of ten years from
and after the establishment of each
mandatory aforesaid
Section 2. That all personal property
of every description, including build
ings and machinery necessary for and
used in the operation of any sugar fac
tory engaged in the manufacture of
sugar from sugar cane, beets or other
bearing plants grown in Utah, also all
real property actually used by any sll-
gar factory for manufacturing purpos-
es, shall be exempt from air territorial,
school, county and municipal taxes for
the period of five years from and after
the commencement of the operation of
the mandatory aforesaid, providing
that this act shall not apply to any
sugar factory which has not been com
pleted and put in operation prior to
Jan. l, 1896
Section 3. This act shall not apply
to any sugar mandatory built prior
to Jan. 1, 1894
AS the bill is defunct beyond resusci-
tation. it may be thought needless to
refer to it. Yet while we like to OBJ
serve the adage, speak kindly of the
dead" in this instance we find it neces-
sary not only to refer to the BILL but
also to condemn it as wrong in prin-
ciple and in opposition to existing law
And this because the Evening News OF
Tuesday takes up the cudgels in it's be-
half and errs in finding fault with the
Governor in relation TO it. The News
says;
We do not refer to the various boun-
ty bills, to which, as a Democrat, he
might naturally be deemed opposed,
but to the bill, which some Democra is
in the Legislature and very many out
of 1t approved, eXempting from taxa
ton for a term of years investments
in certain manufacturing enterprises.
chemical works, etc. This measure
seemed well calculated to induce the
creation of these industries without
taking a dollar from the public treas
ury for the purpose; but it was per-
mitted to die for lack of any action
on the part of the executive; no state
ment of objections being made, and
consequently no opportunity given for
amendment that might have removed
the objections.
In proof that the Governor did not
treat the bill in the manner described,
we reproduce the text of the Cover
nor's veto as it appeared in The Her
aid of Tuesday morning:
II herewith return an act to encour-
age the establishment of certain man
ufacturing institutions within the ter
ritOry of Utah, without my approval,
for the following reasons: An act Of
Congress, approved July 80, 1886, pro-
vides as follows:
BE it enacted, etc, that the Legis-
latures of the territories of the United
States, now or hereafter to be organ
lied, shall not pass local or special
laws in any of the following cases, that
is to say, granting to any corporation.
association or individual, any special
or exclusive privilege, immunity or
franchise, whatever.
This bill, it seems to me, comes
squarely within the letter of this act,
and is prohibited by it.
Again. think the discrimination in
favor Of certain industries is unfair
and unjust to the great body of the
people of this territory"
Thus it will be seen that the Cover
nor did take action on the bill, but
gave very excellent reasons for inter
posing his veto. The bill is clearly in
violation of the congressional statute
cited by the Governor and is unjust to
other industries. The courts have
passed on similar measures as The
Herald has previously shown, and pro-
nounced them void. as they provided
for unequal taxation.
The principle is wrong of any law
which gives special privileges to a
class and denies them to others. 1t is
no defense of the bill that similar
measures have been passed here or
elsewhere. If one wrong has been per-
mitted, that is no good reason why
others should be added The bill has
properly been killed; it is better now
to let it be buried.
-
mTIE, SrJonT Mt A SrFeT1S, r-rHtr