The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-03-26

oppose the present bill.
He declared his belief that the bill
was revenue law, not a license law,
and had no standing in the senate I'M
til it had come from the house. He
analysed the figures to show that the
bill was a discrimination against the
small retailer, who might be compelled
to add another line to his stock to hold
his trade. 1t cost no more to carry
twelve lines than six. The man with
twelve could get more trade than the
man with five, yet he paid but little
more license per line. Many dry goods
stores carried at present thirteen lines
which would be taxable in the sum of
S., 900. He could cut off one line, and
be taxed $1,000, but he would have to
take off eight lines to get into the next
lower division. Furniture men in Min
neapolis carried from seven to eleven
lines, which would require a tax of
81, 900. A furniture store confined to
five lines would be driven out of bust
ness. Country furniture dealers GUS
tonnarily carried hardware and enough
other lines to bring them within the
$4,000 limit. Druggists carried nine
lines, but the down town druggists
were willing to reduce to four or five.
A druggist in the suburbs must carry
more. He said William Donaldson
would be taxed under the bill $4,000
He would add to his selling price one
per cent, which would come from the
consumer, and would give him a mar
gin of $500 over and above his license.
The small retailer, on the other hand,
would have to raise his prices from
s to 10 per cent to pay his tax.
Why stop with the department
store? Why not carry the movement
into the mills and factories. One man
swore that his stock was worth
from 81 200 to $500. He was taxed on
$377. Another swore that his stock
was worth about $4,000. 1t was taxed
at S5,625. Another who said his stock
was worth 100000 showed a valuation of
$4,000, while the proprietor of one of
the large department stores testified
that he carried an average stock of half
million. He was taxed at S10l 900.
He felt that he was taking the unpopu-
lar side of the question, but was conf
dent that the righteousness Of the bill
would be discovered when it had sent
many more Of the smaller retail mer-
chants down to the commercial grave
yard.
Senator Culkin said that Senator
Johnson was on record to the effect
that the department stores were a
menace to the retail trade of great
cities.
He resented the imputation that the
committee had been unfair He thought
the principle, should not oppose this
bill unless he had something better
to substitute for it. The Illinois senate,
with but four dissenting votes, had
passed a similar bill. This was not q
revenue bill or an estate tax. 1t was
nothing more than a municipal tax.
The state had the power to enact the
bill; the senate had the power to origin
ate it. The rate of taxation paid by
the large merchants was enough TO
shock any student of affairs. Schune-
mann & Evans, paying tax on $1,000,
had a stock, on their own story, worth
$4,000 The Donaldson figures were
equally inconsistent.
In these stores girls and boys were
doing the work men and women had
formerly done. Wages were depressed
accordingly. These stores were sapping
out the life of the middle class of
society, on which rested the perpetuity
of American institutions.
Senator Wyman said his first thought
was that the bill was unreasonable,
but he was now willing to do any
thing he could to remedy existing evils,
If it could be none without injustice.
The burden Of Senator Johnson's speech
had been that the bill Disseminated in
favor of. the big department stores.
He had some amendments which he
thought would remedy this. One was
to eliminate class So. adding it to class
II, so as to make only 81 classes. The
other Simplified the grocery classified
ton by adding ammonia, axle grease,
bath brick, bread, cakes and pastry,
cigars, fruits, salt and smoked meats,
and a number of other articles COM
monty carried but not classified.
Senator Barr sent up an amendment
to the second class, covering blank
books and miscellaneous stationery.
Senator Sperry asked to amend to
combine classes and 46. All these
were accepted by the author.
Senator Spencer. of Duluth, moved
that the bill be Indefinitely postponed,
on the ground that it was unconstitu
tiOnal, unnecessary, uncalled for, and
un-American. On the first count he
said he believed it to be a revenue
measure, which should originate in the
other house.
Senator Greer wanted to go through
the bill section by section.
Senator Porter opposed the motion to
Indefinitely postpone. He thought the
bill should be amended if it needed il,
and passed, and that soon.
He moved to refer the bill and all
amendments to the special committee
for an early report.
Senator Howard said the lobby III
evidence would be sufficient guarantee
that amendments would come in large
numbers.
Senator McHale said the present
classification would work severely on
country stores. There were stores in
Shakopee which carried twenty eight
lines of goods under the classification
in the present bill. This was not the
way to reach the root of this evil.
Senator Sheehan said the department
store monopoly was one of the worst
evils now affecting the business world.
Since he came here in 1885, he had seen
NOT less than 800 merchants fail and
go down to ruin. The business then
done by 300 retail stores was now done
by a few mammoth establishments.
On the argument that the law was
unconstitutional, he declared that the
state had the right to do anything not
expressly prohibited by the federal con-
stitution. Lawyers were taxed in many
states, why not these stores which were
taking away the business of other
stores without sharing the burdnes
Of taxation proportionately.
Senator OZmun wanted the bill limit
ed in it's application to the three big
cities. st. Paul, Minneapolis and Du-
luth.
Senator Ringdal thought the bill was
a step in the right direction. although
he was not unqualifiedly in favor of the
occupation tax.
Senator Schaller said there seemed to
be excellent ground for the belief that
the evils had been traced very close to
the doors of the department stores. He
moved to refer it to the committee to
consider the amendments.
Senator Howard wanted an evening
session and the bill forced through.
Senator Sperry said if the bill was
unconstitutional it was vain to consider
any further amendments. He believed
the bill was constitutional, and it was
| sVacf Gn hot