The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-02-21
Minnesota Legislature.
AN AMENDMENT CLUB
Why Tax Bill Opponents Voted for
Wallace Amendments.
HOPE TO,KILL THE BILL THEREBY
Other Amendments Are Considered
and Disposed OF in yari-
GUS Ways.

The passage of the Wallace amendments
yesterday afternoon was secured only
after bitter struggle. The vote was 81
to 46, and an analysis of it shows that
the uncompromtsing enemies OF the code
all voted for the amendments, showing
that they hoped to beat the bill by amend
ing it. Only five democrats, however,
voted for the amendments, of whom three
were city members. The 46 noes were,
with one exception, from the country, and
were for the most part friends of the
bill
MI. jacobson was satisfied with getting
his amendment passed, and voted aye on
the Wallace amendments.
Immediately after the recess James A.
Peterson took the floor and finished his
speech for the bill, which was interrupted
yesterday by his throat giving out. He
said that if the bill passed, the steel
trust would be reached by the permanent
tax commission, and compelled to pay a
fair tax on its mining property. He said
he would prefer to vote for the bill with
out the Wallace amendment, but was will
ing to concede something for the sake of
getting what is good. He would support
the Wallace amendments, also the Jacob
son amendment. The farmers, he said,
would not lose by the bill but gain.
,
Mr. Dobbin called attention to the sec
ton OF the bill relating to county super
visors and the tax commission. He said
they gave ample machinery to reach
property, and that the bill would still be
effective for reaching personal property,
without the necessity of the Jacobson
amendment.
saseng Opposes Amendment. =.
Mr.. Sageng took issue with both of
them. He said that all laws were drastic
and 1nquisitorial, and that these features
were vital to the bill. The amendments
were in the interest of tax dodgers. In
Michigan, with no drastic features, the
tax commission raised urban valuation l;
| per cent. and rural valuation was raised
| 70 per cent. The 'unholy spirit of COM
promise in the cir BODIED disaster for the
| session. Those who favored an income
tax were not sincere. Such tax coulG
! only be enforced by drastic and inquisi.
torial features.
| Mr.. Dunn offered an amendment to the
Jacobson amendment, adding the words
or other board authorized to abate
| taxes, so as to make it apply to Ram.
sey county. This was adopted, and or
roll call the Jacobson amendment was
adopted, 81 to IS. The negative vote wa.
as follows:
! NAYS,Barteau, Berg, Bosworth, Bury
Haory feF Me FuS doI Hickey Hura
| man, Umland, Wilcox.-1S. ,-.-.- -. ~
-! Mr.. Roberts said the Wallace amend
,ment removed the fnquisitorial feature!
from the assessor, but not from the coun
" supervisor, the county board of re-
view, or the state tax commission. I
! was still adapted to reach the big fellows
Mr.. Roberts and Mr.. Jackson piled Mr.
Sageng with questions. He would no
admit that he favored tax commission
Mr.. Roberts said that $S0,0O0,O 900 of tn,
| increase in rural assessments in Michigan
came from the iron mines. He hopet
| farmer members would not be scared be
cause there were plenty of inquisitori
features left.
Mr.. sageng said he had found for him
self that the assessed valuation of st
Paul real estate was Ct per cent OF tn,
real value. The per cent in farming dis
tricts was only 80 or 40 per cent Thi
was right. because in the centers sucl
vast quantities Of money escaped taxa
-, ton. The country had a right to 81
down on proposition to let this propert,
escape.
G. W. Armstrong said the question wa
| unimportant, as the one tax involved be
| tween city and country was the state tax
too trivial thing to wrangle about.
Mr.. Larson said the farmers were no
wanting the fnquisitorial features cut out
The proposition came from representa-
tives Of interests that were kicking. H
would prefer to see the bill pass in it
present form.
The Final Vote.
The Wallace amendments were carrie
BY, the the following vote;
G. w; Armstrong, J. A.; Babcock, Bartaau
Benson, Berg, Bosworth, Burns, Bury, But
Ter, Dobbin. Dunn, Ferris, Fust. Haugen
IS,rro,
Hymes, Jackson jacobson. johnson, Kelly
Lane, Laybourn, Lee, Mahood. Mallory, Mark
M MOpy M9Ts Nelson oanno. W. Nolan Hoyss
der, scherf, schurman, Smith, Stevenson
Swanson, Sweet, Wallace, Ward. Washb b.
Brubaker Bush Cooke, Cumming, Deals
Dorsey, Carney Gait, Gandrud, Grass, Hard
Hogan, Hunt, Johnsrud, Larson, Lernkt
} Lonemen. Martin, Miller. Nelson, H. K, Neu
; bauer. Nichols. Norman, 0fsthun, Oppegaare
Rider, Ryan sageng. Schultz, schwarg, Start l
Sites, Torson, finland, Won Valid, Wilde
I-46.
| Speaker Bowling, in explaining hi
vote, said he would prefer the bill in it
} original form, but was willing to tax
!, what he could get.
, Grain Amendment Lost.
| The question then came upon tn
amendment striking out sections SO an
7 "a, relating to listing by consignee. Thi
amendment was lost. and the section
( stand. This reaches grain In elevators.
Il The next amendment was the one re
storing the present forms of list in plac
Of the one proposed by the commissio
in section 49, This was rejected, an
the new list in the bill is retained. Thi
: list was amended to add "steam engine
including threshing machines to sui
division 10, and to add bowling alleys.
Mr.. Hickey moved to strike out section
81 and SIS, requiring county auditors
mail lists of assessments to tax payer
Mr.. Stark said it seemed to bN cir
on basis OF striking out everything
The amendment was lost. ~.
VI The section relating to building and loa