The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1903-06-26
The Taxation Amendme i.

to demand the defeat of what is known
as the taxation amendment to the con-
stitution of the state of Ohio. which is
to be voted upon at the November
election this fall. 1t is a Republican
measure and 1t met its first open oppo-
sition at the hands of Republicans in
Scio representative convention when
the delegates of Harrison and Carroll
counties met and nominated Thomas
II. Watson.
1t has been the plan of the Repub-
lican party to have the county, dis
trict and state conventions endorse the
amendments to the constitution byres-
olution and urge their adoption. This
slate had gone through without oppo-
sition for the reason that no one had
ever given the matter a second thought
or made any comparisons to ascertain
in what particular the amendments
would change the constitution.
At the Scio convention the usual res
olution was introduced endorsing the
three great amendments, nothing be-
ing said of the other two. Ex-Repre
sentative S. S. Hammill, of Harrison
county who is farmer and always
jealous OF the farmers rights, op-
posed the adoption of the sweeping
resolution and offered the following:
Resolved, That we as an agricul-
tural district are opposed to the adop-
ton of the proposed Taxation Amend
ment of the state constitution. The
uniform classification of property for
state taxation purposes as provided
for in our present constitution should
not be changed to detriment of the
agricultural interests"
Mr.. Hammill supported his resolu-
ton in a strong speech in which he
insisted that the object of the pro-
posed taxation amendment was to al
low certain classes of property to es-
cape taxation while the great burden
would rest upon the farmer and those
who owned real estate, while moneys,
credits, bonds, stocks, ETC., would be
exempt The matter came like flash
of lightning out of clear sky to the
politicians who were there. A good
many of the rural delegates were fall
ing with Hammill and it looked as
though there would be trouble in car
rying out instructions from headquart-
ers. A lot of party orators took up the
defense and urged that the party could
be trusted not to make any blunders
in a matter of such vital importance.
Hammill insisted that it opened the
door for the escape of the very fellows
who had been dOdging taxation for
years and would entrench the trusts
and the security holders more strong
ly than ever; that this state would
soon be as bad as New Jersey where
all the fake companies in the country
find home.
The matter got so threatening that
q motion was made to table Farmer
Hammill's resolution, and the motion
was forced through by the aid Of the
party lash.
This episode has led the public to
ask what the proposed change in the
constitution is with regard to the mat
ter of the taxation Of property. The
portion which it is sought to change
is section of article IL. The present
section says that Laws shall be passed
taxing by a uniform rule all moneys,
credits, investment in bonds, stocks.
joint stock companies, or otherwise,
and also real and personal property
according to it's true value in money"
Then follows the exemptions of school
property, churches. etc.
In the proposed amendment all re-
ferences to stocks, bonds, moneys and
credits, are eliminated, and the new
article simply states that "The gen.
eral assembly shall provide for the
raising of revenue for all state and
local purposes as it shall deem prop
err The subjects for taxation shall
be classified and the taxation shall be
uniform on all subjects Of the same
class, and shall be Just to the subject
taxed"
The contention Is that IL the trusts
and monied classes should get control
Of the legislature that there would be
nothing in the constitution that would
compel them to tax bonds, stocks and
other securities. and the question
raised is why this amendment is de-
manded. 1t adds nothing to the power
Of the state to levy taxes, but on the
other hand leaves what is known as