The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1896-03-25
AN IMPORTANT DISCUSSION.
The Taxation of Railroad Lands-Let All Sides
be Heard.

Inc Taxation Of Railroad Lands-Let All Sides
be Heard.
Editor Representative.
L see In the last issue of The Representa-
tive letter from H. L. Burgess, Of Lime
Springs, Otter Tail county, ON the subject
of railroad land taxation, in which he
states that if the Anderson bill is ratified
at the polls it will result in the immediate
repeal of the gross-earnings tax. Now,
suppose it did, would it be such a calami-
ty? The railroads in this state pay, un-
der the gross earnings law, $4,000 in
taxes, and the value of the railroads in
this state, other than unused railroad
land, according to their own statement,
is $22S, 1907 ,022. The average tax rate is
23 mills on the dollar.
Now, ii they pay taxes the same as some
ofthe rest of us have to they would pay
$2,625, 53075. Then we tax the SOC, 900
acres at an assessed valuation of 50 per
acre; this would be 10000, 900, at 90
mills $23O,O00, or a total tax for the rail-
roads of $2,015, 530.75 clear gain in favor
OF the Anderson bill, if it does repeal the
gross-earning Law; and if it does not re-
peal the gross-earning law we have gain
OF $1,000 more or less. He says that the
First, because it was born in a Repub-
ilcan camp where every proposition to
aid tho settler was voted down, and every
effort to curtail the thefts and protect
the interests of the state were white
washed.
Second-Because it meets with the ap-
prevail of all hackers of ring rule and
political "heelers' in the state.
Now if Mr.. Burgess will look up the
history of that bill he will find it origin
ated right here in Aitkin county, among
the people who suffer from the effects of
having no tax on railroad lands 1t was
presented to the legislature by the Hon.
Thos. r. Foley, of Aitkin, and was de-
feated by a Populist vote. 1t only need
ed one vote to pass the senate and Pop
ulist voted against it. The bill was pre-
sented again three years ago by the Hon.
J. M. Markham, of Aitkin, and suffered de-
feat. Then at the last session of the
legislature the bill was presented by the
Hon. VIM. Anderson and became known
as the Anderson Bill" and when it
came to vote Populist was not ac-
counted for and but for change of vote
the bill would have been defeated. The
The Hon. J. @. Cronkhite was the man
who lodged the vote. He had good ex-
cuse. He was sick at the time. His sick
ress continues as he Gains he is Re-
publican now; and l hope that all Popu-
lists who would sci us out and force the
settlers Of the northern part of the state
to bear the burden of double tax by al
lowing the railroad land to go free will
also join the Republican party too.
The Populists have too many Of that sort
now. AS for me 1 am willing to accept
benefit at the hands of any party; and
am willing to do my share to win it, even
If it is got by Republican or Democratic
votes.
AS to the bill meeting the approval of
all hackers of ring rule I must say that
when the bill was before the legislature
in 1898, as the Markham bill, the only per-
son in the state senate that spoke in it's
favor was the Hon. Ignatius Donnelly,
and if Mr.. Burgess will polish up his
memory he will find that Mr.. Donnelly
was not supporting ring rule, coal COM
bines nor lumber thieves, to amy great
extent, in that session.
The railroads know that if the bill
passes they will have to pay more taxes
than they do at present. and when we
tried to get reduced rates to the taxation
convention our efforts were unavailing.
while reduced rates were secured to the
immigration convention held at the same
place on the same day!
Likewise the attorney general and all
legal light to be had on the subject says
that the Anderson bill does not interfere
with the gross earnings law and the rail-
roads will fight the measure and use ev-
cry means at their command to defeat it;
which is very good sign that it is for
the benefit of the people,
Carl E. Taylor.
Cutler, Aitkin county, MINI.