The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1896-04-22


enormous fortunes piled up every year by
individuals engaged in the banking BUSH
ness. And half the social and political cor
ruption would be eliminated.
But, say some this Is paternalism Very
well; let 1t be paternalism. 1t is as good in
the banking business as in the post office
business. And who would go back to Is
cents letter postage? And with govern
ment banks once established who would
want to go back to Is per cent in
terest. when they could get money for
three or four? None but those who wished
to-engage in the banking business would
ever think of it. 49,. .- ........E
Yes. we will also howl for confidence
Let theaold parties stop in surprise. And
before they can find something else to howl
about the truth will have dawned on them
and they will howl no more. but with set
teeth and firm tread they will march to
the polls and proceed to establish ,confi-
dence,' s .
- 49, 81 j. G. AMBURG.
Halstad, MINI. Mar 6, 1896.
VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION.
The Anderson Railroad Tax Law-Let 1t Be
Discussed.
Editor Representative:
i. ANY attempt to. trace or understand the
r. r. legislation Of this state by layman
is something like tracing the way Of the
serpent upon the rock. The constitution
as adopted, and remain to this Gay, provid-
ed that "all taxes to be raised in this state
shall be as nearly equal as may be, and all
property on which taxes are to be levied
shall have cash valuation" etc. In the
face of this, various railroads were taxed
In different wagon gross earnings-and
their lands exempted. which, up to 1871,
When peculiar amendment was adopted,
the supreme court assumed without de-
Gliding" to have been invalid until legal
izdd - III 4A 10.
curiosity, 1 shall quote later on. Aitkin
county, some years since, fought through
the supreme court, suit for taxing some
railroad lands under present laws, of which
decision the following is the syllabus:
Special Laws, 1861 chapter 8, entitled.
lands granted to the Lake Superior &
Mississippi Railroad company" passed
March 3, repealed the proviso~ attached to.
section 1 Of the prior act Is. L, 1865, chap
ter p, passed Feb %, and exempts the.
granted lands from taxation in the ordi!
nary,way as long IS they continue to be-
owned by the company.
Assuming. without deciding, that laws.
passed subsequently, to the adoption of the
state constitution providing for the pay
mentS of a percentage on the gross earn.
ings Of the railroad company in lieu of all,
other taxes on it's railroad and granted
lands were invalid when passed. they were,
validated, by the constitutional amend,
ment of 1871 (artcle 4, sec. 32). Order af-:
firmed. .-.-- --...
MITCHELL. ].
The following is what term a curios-.
ty, and just referred to by the court:
ITake this from Statutes Of IS bottom of
page 21) ~,r n- ...-
Is there any authority here for taxing
railroad property under different system
from other property? Indirectly, perhaps.
yes. Directly and in plain language, no..
A court could rule either way without do.
ing violence to language. We see the con-
struction in the decision cited. The au--
thOrity for exemption of lands and per-.
hitting gross earning tax "in lieu Of alI
other taxes" for most Of the other, rail.
roads viii be found i'm q Especial laws
page 247. Statutes 1S7S-passed two years
after this constitutional amendment, and
without submitting to vote of the people!,
But reading. the amendment over again:
you get FAINT idea that this is accord
ing to law" 1t is orly when you attemp'
the repeal or amendment" to any law:
passed before or after the adoption Of this
sec. 81, that you must. have the peoples
approval before the law will take effect.
Seei One amendment to this law in the
interest of the people was submitted, but
failed to be. ratified by majority of the
electors of the state voting at such cleo
ton." Herein lies the danger to the pend
ing amendments ma jOrity being required
not only over those voting against but of
many voters don't Ike time or interest
enough to decide on the merits of consti-
tutiOnal amendments and hence they don't
vote on them at ALL !. But it is claimed by
some that this gross earning tax, being ac-
cumulative, l. e. beginning with one per
cent first three years then two per cent for
seven years and after that, three per cent
and having now reached an aggregate of
nearly one million dollars year. the rail-
roads now desire to be taxed like other
people and that the adoption Of this An
derson law will repeal the gross earning
tax. This argument will not hold waters.
Read the Anderson law and you will find
that such a construction would be impos.'
sible The purport of it is, that, CONG
what may, the gross earnings tax shalt
not be disturbed. All that court could
possibly do-and of this there is great dam
ger-would be to construct the SPECIALIZE
referred to as contract and that YOU
could not tax the vacant lands as long as
the income tax prevails. Such decision
would not change the situation of today
Hence 1t would Seem that all will finally
depend on the supreme court, and 1t is 10
be hoped that for once 1t will side with the
under dog, and imagine can hear the
people cry out: eve beseech you, wrest
once the law to your {our) authority to do
great right do little wrong and curb
this cruel (corporatiOn) devil of his will!'
My conclusion u.s. that no harm can come
from adopting this law and that some good
may come, and that every voter siding
! with the people as against the corporation
should by all means agitate, work and vote
for the Anderson law. even If some honest
| people have a contrary opinion. Among
such may mention L. H. Burgess, Of Of
| tertail, who, in the last Representative
| seems to entertain the idea of woodchuck
concealed somewhere. -
o. CT FARsDALE.