The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-02-17
Tax Committee Will Move to Have
Constitutional Amendments Re- ,
called From Judiciary.
This Decision Was the First Test.
The Vote Stood Nine to
Seven.

do business Mr.. jacobson suggested that
Chairman Wallace outline plan for
work.
Mr. Wallace thought the committee
should first adopt such amendments as
were generally agreed upon, such as the
$500 exemption, the vessel taxation and
others. The committee could then take
up the disputed points and thresh them
out.
Mr.. Rich, in his usual off-hand fashion,
sprung the opposition program He said:
Il am more interested in the constitu-
tional amendments than 1 am in the bill.
should like to hear them first
Chairman Wallace said: "They are, not
in our hands. They have been referred
to the judiciary committee"
Demand for Amendments.
| Mr.. Kelly. chimed in with Mr.. Rich,
saying that he wanted to see the consti-
tutfonal amendments. He did not appre-
bend that the committee could finish it's
| work in one day or in six days.
Mr.. jacobson said: ITO get the matter
before the house. would move that the
bill be reported back without recommen-
| dalton; that we agree upon such amend
| ments AS we consider necessary, and that
| they be printed separately and reported
back with the bill. This would save re-
printing the bill. tt ink this will be the
lucduS VI q ISdSOudUlG -Oc-t-
| tween the friends OF the bill! as it stands
and those who are willing to report 1t in
| amended form. I apprehend that there
will be no opposition to reporting the bill
! back in some shape. II we take 1t I'D
Esection by section. amendments may be
carried here; but that would settle moth
=! ing in the house and oily waste our time.
ing in the house and only waste our time.
sibility and would exercise their judg-
| ment. Any other course will lead to con-
| fusion and will delay our work one or
| two weeks"
| Mr.. Rich said: 81 intend to vote for the
indefinite postponement of this bill but
I want to do it after considering the con-
| stitutional amendments, and do it with
some idea, as to what amendments We
| will submit
| Mr.. Washburn said: 81 would like to
| know if there is great difference Of
| opinion on the amendments. If we can
not get together on them would be per-
fectly willing to patch up the old law.
If there is no great difference on them,
and we can agree on amendments, would
1 favor putting the law over until we can
get a clean board for proper revision.
| Chairman Wallace said that discussion
| of amendments was out of order, as THEY
| were not before the committee. Mr.. Burns
| tried to start the ball rolling by sug-
costing that the $500 exemption could be
agreed on as an amendment before adj
/ journing for lunch.
| Mr.. Kelly returned to the charge. He
said: "These questions are so interviewer
that we cannot separate them. To do the
| most good for the great number, we must
consider the whole question together. In
my opinion the tax commission in draft
ing this bill went backwards. The ques-
! tion of the amendments cannot be sep
Earated from the consideration of this
BILL
Opposition Plan Sprung.
! All this discussion had been out of or
| der. Mr.. Laybourn put it in order and
disclosed the plan. of the opposition by
making the pivotal motion. Its effect has
already been stated. 1t directed the chair
man of the committee to move in the
| house tomorrow the recall of the con-
stitutional amendment bills from the ju-
dietary committee and their reference to
! the tax committee.
/ Mr.. Jacobson jumped on the proposition
! eXcitedly. This can only result in no
action at ALL" he said. cit is made with
no other intent than to prevent all tax
| legislation. We have all this committee
can do to agree on a tax bill without
calling for another question on which we
can never agree. This would only delay
the house two or three weeks and at the
end of that time we would be just as
much at sea as ever"
/ Mr.. Kelly interrupted: Don't you see
that the two questions are so interviewer
| that we must take them up together?" e
Mr.. Jacobson replied: What effect
would the amendments have upon the bill
| when they cannot go into effect until next
winter? Would they have any effect on
! the bill?''
I Mr. Kelly tried to answer 'sCan you
answer by yes or nor demanded Mr.. Ja-
cobson. mo. l cannot" Mr.. Kelly re-
flied. ''Then 1 won't be interrupted y
said Mr.. Jacobson. He went on to say
that the divergence of opinion on the
! amendments was as great as on the bill
| They would take more time than the bill,
| and the effect of the motion could not be
anything but, delay.
| Mr.. Washburn objected to Mr.. Jacob
sons personalities, and said that he ought
not to be compelled to listen to them He
continued, saying that the constitutional
amendment bill ought never to have gone
| to the judiciary committee. For himself,
/ he said IL he could only know that the
amendments would be passed he would be
with Mr.. Jacobson on good many propo-
sitions.
| Mr.. Larsen suggested that to save time
| the tax committee should go ahead and
do what it could with the bill and let the
| judiciary committee do its best with the
constitutional amendments
Mr.. sHurd said he wanted to do the BUSH
ness in business-like way. 1t seemed to
him that the basis of taxation was con-
tstitution, and he could not see how the
committee could get up proposition
without considering the amendments.
Mr.. Schwarg said: IF you get those
amendments back we will have to frame
the tax law in accordance with the pres
ent constitution. What the constitution
Is to be two years from now, won't help
US at this time.
Mr. Burns said: 81 believe that 1t is
evident that it is the determination Of