The Saint Paul globe., 1899-03-23
THE GROSS EARNINGS BILL.

occupancy of the noble building now so
slowly taking form.
THE GROSS EARNINGS BILL.
1t is quite evident that the senate ju-
dietary committee has bestowed more
careful attention on the provisions of tho
Jacobson railroad gross earnings bill
than has the author of that measure
himself. In the committees report. sub
mitted yesterday. to Indefinitely post
pone the bill, there Is internal evidence
to this effect The cogency of its rea-
soning is unassailable. 1t is a clear, terse
statement of many good and valid
reasons for stalwart objection to the
measure that the wonder is why these
reasons should not have promptly de-
TERED Mr.. Jacobson from ever pressing
such a conglomeration of vicious, un-
warranted and assailable legislation for
favorable consideration by any inteli-
gent body of men.
In the face of all this the senate COM
mittee is. however. disposed to be fair
When the report. accompanied by
statement, had been read, the chairman
of the judiciary committee, Senator
Young, had the report laid on the table
and the statement printed for careful
consideration before coming to a vote on
adoption of the report. 1t would be
misleading and paradoxical statement to
say that the committee has gone thor
oughly into the merits of the bill. 1t pos
sesses no merits whatever 1t does not
possess even negative virtues. accepting
for the moment Mr.. Jacobsons point Of
view, for, could he once convert this mass
of conflicting, undgested, spasmodic, va
porish and incongrous ATTEMPTED legisIa-
ton into law. 1t would probably remain
law until the first court took a whirl at
it. and no longer.
To begin with, 1t is a double header.
1t attempts to straddle the horns of two
dilemmas; to ride two horses, each going,
in an opposite direction. If there is one
principle held by courts a trifle stronger
| than another. 1t is that the title of an
act cannot be made an omnibus to carry
distinctly differing classes of legislation
| In the same measure. One portion of
ak1e bill proposes to increase the railroa d
| gross earnings tax from 3 to per cent.
Another portion provides that, if certain
railway companies don't want to paw 4
per cent, they can pay something else.
to be settled between Them and the as
SCISSOR. This feature of the bill, however.
simply attacks itself. One of the more
serious questions presented Is. can the
legislature repeal existing gross earn
! 1nSs laws? Our courts have ruled on this
in number of instances adversely. Sew
eral Of the most prominent lines in Min
nesota came into existence bv yjrtue op
territorial charters. The courts have
held these charters to be valid contracts.
and in the contracts it is stipulated that
gross earnings tax should not exceed 3
| per cent. If Mr.. jacobson can brush
away those judicial opinions with sim
pie ''Shoo, fly" the apparently impossible
becomes merely the lghtsome pastime of
legislative wizard.
Leaving this question, still open and de-
batable, to the senate, we are confront
ed by the other horn of an exceedingly
perpleXing dilemma What would be the
result provided the railroad companies
erected TO stand on the work of the as
SCISSOR? This they have the privilege Of
doing according to the plans and speci
fications Of this curious piece of lesisIa-
| i've brlc-a-brac. 1t is shown conclusive
| ly by the carefully drawn statement of
! the senate committee that more than
| one-tmrd OF the revenues of the state
are derived from railroad taxation This
! fact will not be denied by the author Of
the bill. With the increasing amount in
| volume of business, revenues to the state
nave increased correspondingly, and the
amount left for the people of the state
has correspondingly decreased. But Mr..
Jacobson would kill the goose that laws
the golden egg, and in this way: The
highest rate Of taxation of railroads in
any state adjacent to Minnesota is In
Illinois, where. with the exception of the
Illinois Central, the valuation ia sc 21s
per mile. In Minnesota there are 6.Osa
miles of road
Does Representative Jacobson-does anv
senator in the Minnesota legislature-be-
lieve that at the highest rate of yalua-
tion which could be fairly assessed
against he Minnesota railroads thew
than one-third of the states entire taxa
tion? Provided the roads elected to nav
taxes direct instead of on the per cent
basis would not the state be the loser
And all for what?