Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1906-07-26

ty will be resolved in favor of the
state against the exemption.
1t will be remembered that Section
l of Article TX of our constitution lin.
Its the powsr of the legislative Assem-.
oly to exempt property from taxation
to that to be used for municipal, Liter.
%y, educational, scientific, religious
Or charitable purposes 1t is argued by
Defendants counsel that the exemp
ton of property from taxation, as evi.
denced by the act under consideration.
is a remission by the legislative Assem-.
bly, of a part of the public burden for
charitable purposes and therefore with
in the limits of the power conferred
The exemption is evidently a valuable
donation, but it is certainly not made
for charitable purpose.
We believe that the clause of the
constitution prohibits the legislative
assembly from granting to the house
holders of the state the exemption
from taxation of the property attempt.
ed by the statute, which though in
force when the organic law took effect
was inconsistent Herewith and hence
repealed by the adoption of the con
stitution, and its attempted re-enact.
ment is void as rephgnant thereto. on
the ground that the rate of assessment
and taxation is not uniform or equal as
between householders of the state and
non-residents.
sit is hard even to approximate the
amount of property which will be made
taxable by the decision of the supreme
court" said NJ. Sigler laisk night,
"but I believe that it will be in e4.
cess of $1,0O0,000 in Multnomah, an
may be as high as $1,5OO,0 900. The ex.
emption list of last yea,, which
amounted to 1907 ga, shows only the
exemptions on owners who have moro
than $500 worth of property Those
who have less were not recorded in this
list at all, but would be included as a
result of the new ruling.
eff the eff :ct of the supreme court Is
decision is TO declare the exemption
clause unconstitutional. and I suppose
it is, it will place large amount of
additional work upon my Office an
upon the assessors offices of the other
countiss. The property now exempted
sessment roll fo- the present year
which is to be made out by March /
We shall have to make a partial can
vass at least of our field in order to
revise the lists besides thoroughly go.
ing over ou- own books"
L.. H. Maxwell, chief deputy to AS
SCISSOR Sigle-, was of the opinion wher
seen yesterday afternoon that the
property exempted at present in Multi
nomah county, which will be included
hereafter, amounts to as much as SO,
100000. Multnomah pays approx
mately one-thf.d of the taxes of tn,
state, so that at this rate the new Eul
ing would increase the total tax roll
of Oregon by $6,OOO,000. This amount
however, would probably be too low
as there is larger proposition of small
property owners in other counties OF
the state than is in Multnomah.
The decision of the supreme court
affl cts section of the amendment to
Bellinger and Cotton's annotated codes
and statutes of Oregon, which is as
follows:
''The following property, if owned
by householder and. in actual use, or
kept for use, by and for his or her
family: household goods, furniture and
utensils; two cows, ten sheep, five
swine, and the tools, apparatus, team,
vehicles, harness, or library necessary
to enable any person to carry on his
trade, occupation or profession, by
which such person earns his or her liv-
ing, to the amount of $500, and the ar
ticles to be selected by such house
holder; provided, however, that when
the assessed valuation of the personal
property above enumerated shall
amonnt IN less than $500 then only