East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current, 1906-01-15
STATE TAX COMMISSION SHOULD NOT Be
IGNORED.

ed to the tax measure proposed by
the Willamette Valley Development
league, chiefly because 1t believes that
the tax commission for which the leg
islature of 1906 appropriated $4,000,
should be allowed to try to its utmost
to simplify and reconcile the tangled
tax laws of the state, since it was
created for that purpose. After the
tax commission has been given fair
trial and found to be incapable or un-
willing to formulate comprehensive
law, then let the Development league
or the people or anybody else suggest
remedy. But while the commission
Is working on law II would confuse
matters infinitely to present two or
three contradictory and incomplete
laws, either to the people or the legis-
lature, while, the commission is con-
scientlously doing its duty. For other
reasons the East Oregonian urges the
people to refuse to vote for the meas
ure proposed. The following compre-
hensive review and criticism of the
law is from the Portland Oregonian
and seems to truthfully disclose some
of the Objectionable features of the
law. The Oregonian's criticism is as
follows:
That the tax bill proposed by the
committee of the Farmers and Ship
pers' Congress for enactment under
the initiative contains many errors and
Inconsistencies and will involve the
tax laws of the state in irreconcilable
conflict II 1t should be adopted is the
assertion made by experts on tax leg
islation who have examined the pro-
posed measure.
The principal errors in the law are
due to the fact that several sections of
present laws were copied from the
1902 code and are to be re-enacted as
they then stood, though they were
amended by the legislative sessions of
1903 and 1905. The Inconsistencies
arise from the plan of enacting new
laws without expressly repeating old
ones, thereby leaving a necessity for
litigation in order to determine wheth-
er the new law repeals the old by i'm
plication or whether both the old and
the new can stand side by side.
The bill was drafted by a commit
tee of the league, the committee hav-
ing been appointed last summer by
President b. Hofer and was adopted
by the league at Woodburn, Decem-
ber Ii.
The measure is intended to provide
a more equitable system of assess
ment and taxation" and to be enacted
by the people at the polls next June
independently of the Legislature. The
drafting committee was made up of
J. A. Carson, of Salmon; G.. w. Grif- |
fin of Eugene; j. A. Aupperle of JEFF
ferson; b. f. Jones, of independence, |
and G. A. Hurley, of Vale.
one of the most glaring inconsis- !
tencies is that occasioned by section |
1O4 OF the printed bill, which provides
that the secretary of state, as insur-
ance commissioner. shall be entitled |
to receive the fees and 40 per cent of
the licenses prescribed by law as COM |
pensation for his services" This pro-
vision, IL enacted subsequent to the |
passage of the flat salary law of the |
secretary Of state, in addition to his
salary. fees like those which the leg
islative act cuts off.
PuDllSneu In Pampnlct.
The bill for the proposed law has
been published in pamphlet form and
distributed to every portion of the
state. with blank petitions for sigma
lures, asking that the law be submit
ted to the people. An examination of
the law shows that II must have been
carelessly drawn, for its preamble
misrepresents some of its provisions.
Men who have taken an interest in
the Improvement of the tax laws of
this state are alarmed over the situa-
tion, for they fear that this law may
be adopted by the people because
they favor one of its purposes-the
extension Of the policy of indirect tax
alton. Since the movement has gone
this far before the errors were dis
covered, 1t is feared that the people,
not taking the time to study its pro-
visions, may adopt 1t in June with
out understanding It's full effect.
The first flaw alleged to have been
found in the proposed measure is in
the title and general scope OF the bill.
1t is asserted that the bill violates that
section OF the constitution which pro-
vides that a bill shall embrace but one
subject which subject must be ex-
pressed in the title. Furthermore, the
bill deals with general property tax
laws, license laws, which are not pri
marily tax laws, and inheritance tax
laws, which are essentially different
in principle from property tax laws
or license laws 1t is, therefore, as
serted that all these subjects cannot
be covered I'm one measure.
Second Defect Alleged.
A second defect Is alleged TO exist
because of a conflict between the title
and one of the important sections OF
the bill. The title declares that this is
q bill for an act ITO re-enact the as
sessment and taxation laws of the state
of oregon, including all existing
thereto" ETC., with GER
tain changes enumerated further along
in the title. In the effort to re-enact
the present laws, one very important
existing amendment was overlooked.
The situation may be thus explained
Prior to 1903 the tax law provided
that county courts should levy for
school purposes at least mills on the
dollar. This provision was contained
in section 1874 of the Belinger and
Cotton code. The revenue thus OBJ
tanned was found In many counties to
be insufficient and the legislature of
1908 amended the section by provid-
inu that nnnptv pn,rtc shall lavv n