The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-07-20
WHAf OTHER PEOPLE THINK
: Subscriber Comes to Defense Of
Mayor Rose Of Kansas City, Kan.

Your editorial Of yesterday did
Mayor Rose Of Kansas City, Kan,
slight injustice. Mayor Rose is on the
Tom johnson, Hazen Pingree order of
mayors, and the advocates Of special
privilege have invoked the prohibition
preeme court to get him out of the way.
In 1905, in running for mayor. Mr..
Rose raised the issue Of pure water,
equitable taxation, and no graft. There
was no organization, but with few
friends he made a house-to- house can
vass, and he won by $50 plurality.
| The first serious question that con-
fronted Mayor Rose was that Of EXTEND
ing the franchise Of the Metropolitan
for twenty years had been in control
of the city water and had rendered
abominable service. This company de-
manded thirty years extension.
Mayor Rose and his city counsel, Edwin
>: McAnany, prepared franchise or
dinance, which, while it extended the
company's rights for thirty years, in
expressly stipulated that when the city
should decide to take over the plant all
franchise value should be excluded and
only the physical value of the plant
be considered This model franchise
wa. adopted after a hard fight.
Mayor Rose now came into conflict
With the great tax.dodgimg vested in:
grew out Of his removal Of the city
assessor. The removal was accom-.
plished only after hot fight and with
slender support in the city council. I'm.
mediately the railroad interests of the
entire state, as well as the packing in
terests Of Kansas City, and all the po
litical ''machine forces Of the repub
1ican no r41y IF 3tino111Sinr Gov
ernor Hoch and Attorney General Cole
man, rallied for the purpose of throw
ing Mayor Rose out Of the municipal
OF course he could not be attacked
openly fol-, menacing the special inter
ests with honest assessments for taxa
tion. But +. old-established conditions
law made it possible to attack him col
laterally. -.e.r ~S~r
The state laws of Kansas prohibi
the sale of liquor. There are, there
- fore, no legitimate liquor revenues. Blu
for twenty-five or thirty years it ha
been customary in Kansas for municipa
officials to wink at violations Of tn,
prohibitory law by persons who pay in
direct licenses to the city officials witt
, regularity. In all the river cities som
, such mode of indirect licensing has bee1
!, in vogue for quarter of a century a
, source Of municipal revenue.
Mayor Rose found the custom i
full operation when he came into office
E and he treated it, as his predecesso
|, had done. One Of his party friend
| and supporters criticized him for no
. closing the beer saloons instead Of cor
tinuing to draw municipal revenu
, ."But, = said Mayor Rose, t'the cit
= would be without adequate revenue i
I did i'd that; it it., is short Of revenue eve
+ "That makes no difference reptile
law 50 long as it is the law. -
edo you consider that rule an il
< variable, one to followg" asked Mayo
+ ssWithout exception .: said i hi
friend. s,% -. An, III 5sSs, J.
'."Then why don't you pay taxes o
! the full value Of your personal PROF
ertY, as the law requires?o
The question was asked good-naturei
f ly and received in good part, but
: elected no reply.
!: J., Roses, licensing regime was precisel
9 Ike that Of his republican and Z dem y!
cities and of his republican predecessor
i in Kansas City, except that he sa
g to it that the license fees went into tt
< public fund instead Of private pockets
9 for he required these revenues to (
IS collected regularly on a specific da
s so that they could not be diverted fro
the city treasury without d,etectio
!. not enforced, an opening was made f
~ the collateral attack upon Mayor Ros
No attack was made upon the mayo
La Of other Kansas cities, for none
al them were making trouble for the plu
: dering. corporations. Against May,