The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1906-10-18

=
Hon. B. b. Carroll. auditor Of state. in
opening the campaign In his homo coun-
ty, discussed tho arguments presented in
support OF the democratic-railroad al
lance in Iowa, and completely exposed
the so-called statistics as presented by
Candidate Claude Porter In his speeches.
Mr.. Carroll gave the facts and figures
from his intimate knowledge OF the al
fairs Of state. He showed that the dem
ocratic attack on republican affairs IN
Iowa with regard to the assessments and
taxation has no foundation whatever, but
that while tho local assessors have been
putting UP the taxable value OF farm land
IL per cent, the republican state officials
have raised railway assessments 81 per
cent In his speech. Mr.. Carroll said:
Omitted the Figures.
Tho democratic candidate for govern
or in his opening speech at OttumWa at
tackled tho republican party In Its assess
ment Of railway property IN Iowa at De,
figures In substantiation OF the state
ments made by him, but in doing so TOOK
his data from the thirty-third annual re-
port Of the assessed value OF railway t
include the assessment for the last two
years. Why he should have done this
am not aware. as the thirty-four an,
year year and the IF. figures for the thirty-fifth
report were made public through the
press of the state Aug. g and could nave
been had by. him by addressing letter
to the secretary Of tho executive coun-
Gil requesting the same.
He quotes the assessed value per mile
OF the railways of Iowa In 1880 and states
that the increase since that date has
matter of fact, the value per mile for
the year 1905 over that of 1850 is more
than N,346, or q per cent larger. not
withstandins the fact that IN 1850 proper roper,
ty was supposed to be assessed at actual
value. while now the law provides that
1t shall be assessed at one-fourth OF the
actual value.
The total assessable value Of the rail
way property of the state for 1906 as
compared with that Of 1880 shows an in
crease Of about 156 per cent. while the
increase In mileage is only about lN per
cent.
Assessments and Earnings.
He further quotes figures, to show the
relation between assessments and gross
earnings Of railways as follows: Per
cent of assessments to gross earnings.
1880, 10s per cent; 1894, los per cent; 1904.
1880 was 1897: for 1894. $685. and for
1904, s5,S1. It will be observed that at
each period above referred to the assess
preceding date. It therefore follows that
any increase In the per cent Of assess
ment to gross earnings, as Of the dates
mentioned. was due to an increase In
earnings and not to a decrease In assess
ments.
Would Mr.. Porter favor an increase or
decrease in assessment every time there
Is slight change in gross earnings ags IN IN
earnings should always remain the same?
To give an Illustration, using some OF
the Same figures he has used, let US COM
pare the years 1894 and 1885. In 1884 the
assessed value per mile was $5,292. and
the assessment was los per cent OF the
gross earnings. In 1885 the assessment
was $3.50, but was 1874 per cent OF the
gross earnings, being due to. the heavy
falling OFF in earnings. In order to have
maintained the same relation between
assessments and gross earnings as ex-
been necessary to have reduced the as
sessment to "a, AL per mile.
Democratic Assessments.
Is 1t to be understood that Mr.. Porter
takes exception because the council In
1885 failed to make a reduction of more
than $3.50 per mile in the assessed value
OF railways OF the state in order to meet
q falling of in gross earnings?
He can find interesting food for demo-
cratic thought by comparing the second
assessment Of railway property under
made by him. as follows: In 1891 the as
sessed value per mile was $3.50 For
1893 it was $5.292. or a decrease of s27 per
an increase during the same period of
SOL per mile The relation of assessment
to gross earnings decreased from liz per
cent to 1M per cent.
by Mr.. Porter are correct, they are not
valuable for the purposes for which he
seeks to use them, and serve to confuse
rather than enlghten.
Would Mean Reduction.
How can there be any constant or sim
liar relation existing between assessment
and a., gross earnings OF railways unless
earnings fall off, and is increased every
time the earnings increase?
TO illustrates: The assessment per mile
of railway has been increased every year
for the last six assessments. The gross
earnings were less in 1903 than in 1902.
and less In 1906 than in 1904. Would Mr..
Porter contend that the council should
have decreased the assessment in 1903 and
1875 SO as to maintain the same relation
between assessments and gross earnings
as for the corresponding years previous?
As to Net Earnings.
He also quotes statistics as to the re-
lation Of assessments to net earnings,
still more deceptive thing, as net earn
upon expenditures and methods of book
keeping. For example: From 1905 to
1904 the gross earnings Of all railroads
of the state increased a little more than
100000. while the net earnings decreased
more than $1.0OO000. and the net earn
ings increased more than $4,000 How
can the same or similar ratios between
assessments and gross and net earnings
be maintained when the earnings fuc-
tuate as above1
The fallacy of his argument and the
use of the figures quoted, except to show
that 1t Is impossible to adopt any fixed
rule as q basis for assessment Of rail-
way property without running counter to
every other method Is clearly shown
by the above illustrations and could be
shown by many others Of a similar ma
ture.
Another Failacy.
He also quotes figures to show that
the assessed value Of certain railway
property is but little more now than it
was twenty years ago. 1t is scarcely
fair to attempt to make comparisons now