Cañon City record., 1902-10-02
SOMETHING ABOUT THE
BUCKLIN AMENDMENT

although 1 have not figured it, | be.
lieve this system would attempt to
raise the necessary amount of tax upon
present assessed valuations and let the
rest go free. Such scheme is i'm
practical. 1t won't work SATISFACTORY
ly. 1t cannot. 1t is unjust
OF course / know that Senator Buck
lin has surrounded his bill with lot
of hazy statement and ideas about
taxing franchises and also the
"streak" of land upon which the rail
roads have built their track, but what
would that amount to? | know also
that he claims there is local option
feature in all this so that if we do
not want this measure in Fremont
county we can vote it down, but if
Cbaffee, Park, Teller and Custer
counties for instance, should vote ia
vorably on it they would get it and
what nice time the State Board of
Equalization would have adjusting a
fair rate of taxation between Fremont
and these other counties.
One of the great injustices of the
past which the new Revenue bill
greatly remedies, has been unfair pro.
portion of taxation as between conn
ties.
Don't you see this Bucklin plan
would send us backward twenty-fiv
years.
l have given this measure consider
able thought; have read everything |
could on the subject and have talked
with great number of people and
have never found anyone of any po-
litical faith who had an atom of con-
fidence in the measure working ont
satisfactorily to the people of the state.
Upon my investigation I honestly
believe that if this amendment was
carried through it would deple,e the
Colorado State Treasury and every
county and city treasury in the state
of Colorado aud would close all our
load up every county with an i'm
mense amount of ranches and town
lots from tax sales because no monied
tax sale purchaser would ever buy
property under this law, for he would
Immediately be burdened with the
heavy tax upon it, about oue-third OF
it, cash value yearly, so under this
state of affairs it woud revert to the
county in every instance and you can
see how soon the county would be
swampcd and unable to pay its debts
Just think for instance, of the
county treasurer, clerk, sheriff and
all county officials. jurymen, school
teaches, ETC.. getting their pay for
their services in ranches or town lots
1t would produce state of affairs
worse than the wildcat money times
of 1851
Cne argument that / understand is
made i'll favor of this bill is, that it
would compel the improvements of
vacant lots. Now lets see whether it
would. Everything Else is governed
by the law of supply and demand.
Does anyone for an instance believe
that such foolish law as this would
compel the vacant lot owners of
Canon for instance, to build upon
every individual lot they own in this
city? They are over 4, 900 vacant lots
here and at present no demand tor
more houses so why should anyone
build any faster than the demand
calls for? The effect of this law
would be TO keep people out of Colo
RADIO SO we would in fact be liable to
have one half of our present houses
empty. l give it out cold and fiat as
my honest opinion that if this amend
ment. becomes law that every car
penter, mason. painter, plasterer,
plumber, brick maker. common laborer
or any man IN any branch of trade
connected with the building of houses
will be thrown out of employment in
this county and will remain out of
employment until it is repealed, pro-
viding that it can be repealed If ever
enacted OF course if the above
then the effect upon the coal miner
and oil producer will be felt also and
they will soon be out of job.
The amendment should be labeled
IAN amendment to get rid of the
small home owner, the individual
land owner. and to drive men of small
means out of Colorado. or as some
one has called it ''the ruination Of
Colorado" because that is going to be
the result il it ever becomes law.
Our present system of assessing
taxes and collecting them under the
new revenue law us passed by the last