The copper era., 1905-08-03
AS TO EQUALIZATION

m1SCOnStrueQ US Ser1eS or drLlCleS on equalization and taxation. The Guardian seems to be laboring under the opinion that the ERA has been shying a few stray bricks at As sessor Birdno, which is clearly mis- construction of the intent of the ar tiCles. The ERA has repeatedly stated that MT. Birdno was one of the best assessors in the territory. The only fault that can be found with his work is that in some respects he has valued property of the same class in this county higher than it was valued in other counties Of course MT. Birdno is not responsible for the lack of perception on the part of other assessors, but at the same time it compells property own CTS in this county to pay a heavier tax than those who own property of the same class in adjoining counties.
 As an illustration, we will take the banks, which are assessed at seventy five per cent. of their par value in Graham county, while in all other counties but one they are assessed at fifty per cent. MT. Birdno did not over-assess the banks, but the fact remains that they will be compelled to pay a heavier tax than those ot other counties.
 MT. Birdno assessed mortgages in Graham county, and he was right in doing so, but we are informed that this is the only county in the terri tors in which morts -ges are assessed, :, hence the money tenders of this county are compelled to stand tax which is not levied on others in the same class of business in other coun- ties of the territory.
 Patented mines, as class, are as- SRCGp6 m (Hr1 ham fN lf Q1000 each, while in Cochise county they are returned at $37.50 per acre. The ERA is not complaining at levy of 5000 for full patented claim. That is cheap enough, but it is certainly unfair to the miners of this county to be compelled to pay taxes on $250 more per claim than the miners of CoChiSe county.
 The Guardian claims the ERA is in- consistent in its criticisms of the territorial board of equalization in regard to it's appraised valuation of railroad and then objects to,the pro- posed wholesale raising of the min ing companies. The position of the ERA on this matter needs no eX- planation to those who have care fully read it's editorials for the past few weeks. The ERA objected to the valuation placed upon the railroads by the territorial board because the main lines were not appraised at anything like the valuation which should have been placed upon them. In this connection it will be remem- bered that the A. SC N. M. R. R. was assessed at almost double that of the Gila Valley road and at only S16OO per mile less than the Southern Pacific. Any man who is familiar with the conditions knows that the A. 6J N. M. was assessed out of all proportion to the value of the other roads. The board had hardly adjourned from making this unequal, unfair and unjust discrimination in its appraise- mentSbefore the newspapers of the artiCles, announced that the board in meeting to be held in August, would double the property values of the territory by raising the returns of the mining companies and cattle men. This, coming as it did in the very face of the refusal of the board to do its plain duty in regard to the assessment of the railroads, caused the ERA to devote considerable space to the matter. The ERA is printed in mining community and is devoted to the interest of mining, and is therefore interested in seeing that the miners are given a fair show. To double the assessments of the mining companies and the cattle men, after having let off the principal railroads at an unreasonable low figure, would certainly be unfair, and would be a blow to two of the principal industries of the territory.
 The ERA would be pleased to see the taxable wealth of the territory doubled, but the raise should fall on all interests equally. It is certainly not fair, nor honest, to single out two industries and compel them to "stand and deliver" for the only reason that they are having a few prosperous years.
 The Guardian says that the "min- ing companies are assessed just about on a par with the railroads" This statement is no doubt correct, and is the principal reason why the ERA is opposed to doubling the taxable wealth of the territory at companies and the cattlemen.
 The Guardian closes its editorial by the following statement:
 ''lf the papers of the mining camps want to be fair let them advocate the assessing of all property justly, no matter whether it be mining property, railroads, cattle, land or merchandise. When this is done there can be no complaint
 The foregoing is in harmony with the ideas which the ERA has been at tempting to convey to the public for some weeks past. It is manifestly unfair to let one class of investors of with one-half of what they should rightly pay and then sock it to the mining companies, because they have no pull with theboard of equaliza- tion.
 Neither is it fair to assess the mines, the banks and the money loaners of this county at a higher valuation than is placedOn the same class in other counties.
 If all the assessors of the territory were as anxious as MT. Birdno to make d good showing there would be no need of a territorial board. but as they are not, the matter of assess ments should be regulated, and in such a manner that no one interest is assessed out of proportion to some other industry.