Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1901-10-26

5nn1a' Satnrdap, Ortnhr
lation of banks and insurance compa-
! ries we do not depend simply upon the
primitive notion of common honesty anu
common sense guiding our examiners OF
| the officers of such corporations. our
code specifies in great detail tlelr au-
ties because experience has shown that
| such requirements are necessary " &c
cure the desired projections.
| PRESENT LAW TOO INl1Ef I'M ! ~
Our present law undoubtedly is' as 10
so often stated, broad enough 10 perm.
US to assess railroads as they ought "
| be and on any basis. But ~ Is a'so
| broad enough and indefinite enough 10
| permit favoritism and inequalities ana
| all sorts of undesirable things. BY our
| lack of definite provisions for assess
| ment we subject our officials to constant
4 temptation or embarrassment from the
| eyer-contiicting views and opportunities
| Of the REPRESENTATIVES of railroads AT the
annual assessments. AT the nearing
\ before the council last March no TWO
| men agreed as to the proper plan Tor as
sessment. One might think there was
| something like collusion to bemuddle the
4 council and befog the public by such
| medley of views. The two new mem
bers must have been nearly distracted
| to keep their wits clear amidst them.
4 The .experience of my successor IN once
lied him souarely to the conclusion, as
recently quoted in the Times-Repuphc-
! an. that a unit rule is necessary TO re-
4 Hove and assist the council in their
work. -
objection is sometimes made that the
/ business of railroads is so complicated
i and vast that we can not expect 70 see .
4 scheme that is Mt all feasible. rms no
4 ton is due chiefly to mtsiniorfna.,oii.
4 Iowa 10 one of the few states thao does
not have definite basis that secures
l,mpartiality in assessments. MODERN IN
4 movements in the conduct OF corporate
undertakings have tended rapiaiy 70
\ uniformity In methods and also because
Of the annual conferences OF railroad
i and tax commissioners and especially
the workings OF the interstate commerce
4 law there is general likeness IN 1ne '
4 bookkeeping of most railroads so thal
4 the difficulty of getting at the returns
4 need not deter US.
t,n,es set forth / believe our discussion
4 win eventually lead to the adoption OF
4 not earnings for the market value OF the
4 stocks and bonds as the basis for valua-
4 t,on. The former as you know con-
\ sida,. the batter plan. but ] shall not
y nrove an obstructionist II the other pan
is most generally followed. Ihere Is one :
4 main objection made to the plan sha. .
4 have urged and that is that by means OF
4 bookkeeping the roads VIII so jug -
4 their books and reports that the s.aee
4 will find nothing to assess. ms az
4 sumption presupposes several erroneous
!, notions. First, that our lawmakers cail
!. mt frame a law defining clearly whas
q operating expenses shall be DEDUCTED.
second. that even II we have law ina.
{. is clear in its provisions our oiileers VIII
neglect or show themselves lneompe-
4 tent "a enforce the lava proposition
4 refnse To entertain: and third, that rail-
! roads would resort to perjury and mis-
1. representation on an immense scale
4 something do not for moment THINK
likely.
A Corporations generally. and to some
:, axtent railroads, are taxed on their ne'
q Incomes in several of our states. IN
Greet Britain, France and Germany
practically all corporations are assessed
4 nm their net income IL there Is any En-
plishman present in this audience ne
Will II think. bear witness that the En-
i p,ish income tax is q very effective
:, method of taxing. But If this plan does
I. pnt meet with general acceptance COM
). nnend YOU to the recent decision OF the
,nnrame court Of Illinois In the now
Il. celebrated school teachers case LOT
writ of mandamus ordering the state
!, lonrd of taxation to assess sunory COT.
porations OF Chicago on the OASIS OF
{. their stocks and bonds. There Is nc
4 doubt that that decision makes such q
II tax effective.
Rnt some one asks, "Do you expect
4 Mr. Ctmmins to take up with your pro-
Z, nnsa,s and advocate them? Do you
I, sneak for him?" My answer to this is
4 that Mr.. Cummins thinks and speaks
i for himself. IT any suggestion OF mine
commends itself to his judgment then,
h md only then, will he urge Its adoption.
8 IF he does not think the Lave needs im-
i. movement he will of course not urge
4 sny change. Judging, however, from
nv own experience and that of Others
/ am pretty sure that he Will soon come
i 10 realize that there Is need of more
definite law. II, he does you may rest
i assured that he will urge its adoption
Il and incorporation into law This rs all
i that any one has right to expect-put
this, as shall show conclusiyely later
i amounts to good deal.
i 1t is often said by those who would
il avoid the discussion Of this subject. on.
4 this question is simply row among
4 railroad attorneys. This or that road
gets fayors the others don't and the lat
4 ter are growing. 1t makes no di1er-
4 cuces in the long run so long as all are
j taxed. So who cares? This is very
i narrow view to take and moreover 1t is
1 very seriously wrong. Are you an indl-
i yidual Interested in your netghbors pay
4 ing their full share of taxes? Do you
4 care whether the workingman is as
sessed at high rate of valuation on ms
!. little homestead and his wealthy neigh
tors at a low rate? Such inequality is
4 wrong and wrong is wrong be 1t among
4 men or among corporations and unless
4 corrected it breeds evils upon evils. We
can not afford to ignore the inequities IN
! our railroad assessments If we would
J preserve our state from some OF the
most corrupting influences In our po-
4 litical life.
4. In permitting one road to be favored at
the expense of its rivals and the taxpay-
| ~. ~. ne eYnN