The daily morning journal and courier., 1901-03-19
Some Illustrattons.

To the Editor of the Journal and Courier:
 With your kind permission we desire to make use Of your dignified pages te
 reply to MT, Henry c. Rowe's defence
 of his bill But before doing so we de- sire to say that while we think he is wise in withdrawing from the arena ol "wordy warfare' we must insist that | there is no amount of dignity behind which he can hide. Having thrown | down the gauntlet he must now face the music. We have had altogether too | much of the Hamiltonian idea of gov- ernment, which being interpreted reads l take care of the rich, and the rich will , take care of the poor" and when this has been in operation for a given time it always develops into: Take care of the rich and let the poor take care of themselves. And in this kind of busi- ness there is always an enormous amount of dignity, in fact it seems to be the only stock in trade of the benev- olent assimilation of other peoples property. I. is so respectable, so re- ligious, so benignant and refined, the velvet paw is so soft and the methods so slow and obscure that many are hoodwinked by the dignity and few can penetrate the obscurity and detect the sinuGsity We are thankful, therefore, that Colonel Osborn has the courage and manliness to come out as he has done and tell the truth even at the ex- pense of his dignity, which we do not admit.
 In this letter MT. Rowe still persists in calling his bill a poor mans meas ure, giving instances of small properties none of which go above $300O, the in- ference being that the object of the bill is to protect the workingmen in the possession of his hard earned home, in fact work the infant industry" scheme on us in another way.
 We desire to give MT. Rowe the full est opportunity of practically applying his proposition and have been at some pains to secure three sets of figures covering three pieces of property, each of which is a good specimen of its class which we may designate average, me dium and large. Now if MT. Rowe will kindly apply his proposition to each of these properties, giving the probable results of its working, we should then be getting down to practical working basis, and have an object lesson before our eyes, that would at once put stop to all 'wordy warfare"
 Exhibit A-409 Edgewood avenue; w. Trueman owner, land, $1,750; improve ments, ss,7S0; total $5,5S0; owners val uation. S5700
 Exhibit B-490 Orange street; H. c. Rowe, owner; land, $9,375; improve ments, $1OSO0; total, s19.455; owners valuation, $14,OO0.
 Exhibit C-600 Whnlley avenue; J. c. Hubinger, owner; land, S49S60; im- provements, s52, 900; total s1o1s6O.
 Exhibit A shows over ass sessment on land and under assessment on improve ments. Taken altogether it is a good illustration of the fair valuation of this class of property, which form so large an item in the total.
 Exhibit B shows land valued at S125 | per foot, which is the same as adjoining Taking the owners sworn | of 14,000 for the whole prop- | erty, we have only $4625 for a splendid | and barn, which compares un- favorably with A, whose house alone | cost $4,200 It would seem that B's as- sworn statement.
 Exhibit c shows under-a sessment of | land, which, if put at same price as ad- | joining property, would be $66,4SO for land alone, leaving only $34,SS0 for the palace and Improvements.
 W. Trueman.