Omaha daily bee., 1903-05-26
INSULTING POPULAR iNrELLIeHNos

In assessing the railroads OF the state at
less valuation than was put upon them ten
years ago is stale and Improbable All
property In the state Of every sort Is as
sessed at less rate than ten years ago, as
the grand assessment roll fully demon
strates. II the State Board of Equalization
failed TO lower railroad assessments to cor
respond to the work OF the local assessors,
who have the first 60 at valuations, II
would not be board OF equalization at
all. II the board had the power under the
law which has not yet passed out, to raise
the assessments of other property to cor
respond to the actual increased value over
ten years ago, and failed to do II, there
would be plenty Of room for criticism. But
II has no such power until the new revenue
law takes effect, which will be In time for
the next assessment.-Lincoln Journal.
When the railroad organs attempt to
uphold the state board in the as
sessment Of railroad property they sim
ply insult popular intelligence. The ac-
tlon, of this years state board was SIM
ply a repetition of the unmitigated out
rage perpetrated by the state board last
year, when it turned a deaf ear to the
earnest appeal for the assessment Of the
railroad franchises and in the test
case brought before the supreme court
deliberately took the side of the rail-
roads and allowed the railroad attor-
neys to formulate their defense for re-
fusing to carry out the plain letter of
the constitution.
Last year the railroad franchises,
which constitute the most valuable
asset of the railroads, were ignored un-
der the plea that the board did not know
that it had any right to assess them, but
this year the board did know that 1t
could not plead the baby act in defiance
Of the overwhelming popular sentiment
in favor of equitable taxation.
1t is not true that all property in the
state of every sort was assessed at a
less rate ten years ago than last year,
but If there is a notable shrinkage in
the assessment Of certain classes Of
property it is justified by the material
shrinkage in it's market price. This is
true Of agricultural machinery, sewing
machines, clocks and watches, silver
ware, musical instruments and other
fabrics, but these properties constitute
small fraction Of the grand assessment
roll.
Assume, however, that the higher as
sessment of railroads ten years ago was
based on the higher assessment of all
other classes of property, how does that
fact justify the present board in it's de-
hberate disregard Of the relative as
sessed valuation of railroads to all other
classes Of taxable property in 1902 as
compared with the preceding year7 In
1901 the taxable land in Nebraska ag-
gregated 30, ,225,613 acres, assessed for
$79,615,1 1876. In 1902 the taxable lands
aggregated 1881, 100 acres, assessed for
$S2,95SO16, or an increase Of So, 3,2S2, 1921
In the assessment Of lands, equal to 5Ih
per cent increase for 1902 over 1901.
But the increase of the railroad assess
ment for 1902 over 1901 is only seven
eighths OF ] per cent. The aggregate
assessment of real. estate for 1901 was
$114,164, 105 and for 1902 $116,363, 704, or
an increase of $2,199, ,59e. Have rail.
roads decreased in earning power and
value within the last year?
In their argument before the supreme
court last year the railroad attorneys
representing the Burlington and Union
Pacific roads insisted that the railroads
should be assessed no higher than 10
per cent of their actual value. The av-
erage assessed value Of land of all
grades for 1902 was $3.50 an acre,
which, multiplied by 10, would mean
that lands in Nebraska are valued
at an average of $500 per acre. Inas-
much as more than one-half of the tax
able land in Nebraska is in the semi
arid region and large portion IN the
sandhills, would a man who values his
reputation contend that the land values
are ten times as high as the assessment 2
Multiply the railroad assessment by 10
and we have in round figures $265, ,OOO,-
600, when in fact the railroads of Ne
braska are marketable for from $3lB.-
100000 to 1925, 100000.
We have the assurance of Governor
Mickey that this year the board took
under consideration the value of the
terminals of each road as we'll as the
value Of its other tangible property. II
this is true, what value did this board
place upon the terminals of the Union
Pacific at Omaha? The earnings of the
Union Pacific road in 1902 were 500
per mile greater than in 1901, mile for
mile for main line and branches, but the
board only added 500 per mile to the
value of the main line and not a dollar
to the branches. If the increased earn
ings have been entirely ignored and the
terminals taken into consideration. the
800 per mile represented an increase in
the main line of SAG. 700. which, multi
piled by TO- would yield S467 200. How
does that figure compare with the testi-
mony of the Union Pacific experts in
the maximum rate case, who placed the
lowest value of the Omaha terminals of
the Union Pacific at S15.OOo,OOO, or more
than thirty-two times as much as the
state board claims to have done?
At one-tenth of its actual value the
distribution to the main line would have
been $1,5oo,OOo, or $4,000 per mile, in.
| stead Of SIO0 mar mile Nry.t5 4.