The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-11-01
City Ne
ALL OBJECTIONS
FULLY ANSWERED
w. P. ROBERTS Defends WIDE
OPEN TAX AMENDMENT.

Author Of the Bill Says that Most Of
the Points Raised Against It Are Not
Even Plausible Omissions Do Not
Detract Any From Legislatures
Power to Tax.
Representative W.. P. Roberts Of
Minneapolis, author of the "amend-
ment relating to taxation which will
be voted on by the people Of the Min.
nesota next Tuesday, has made a re,
ply to the various objections raised
posing an amendment to the constitu-
Zion, on almost the first day Of the SEES
sion. While the draft he submitted
was changed somewhat before it
passed, Mr.. Roberts was member OF
The conference committee and was ia
miliar with every step: of the proceed
ings. His statement and reply to OBJ
jections is as follows: .r
"First, as to the objection that the
proposed amendment violates the princi-
pies Of justice and equality, which it is
stitution: We may we'll grant that
both should exist in any system of tax.
alton. But it must be borne in mind
constantly. in all governmental affairs,
that it is the practical which is aimed
, at, and the best possible average Of
justice and equality. Neither govern
ment, nor taxation as part Of it, is an
exact science, and never will be, until
the millennium, when we shall need
perience of this state certainly, as it
has everywhere else in the taxed world,
that there can be no hard and fast
rule, by which all sorts of property can
be justly made to pay it's share Of the
tax burdens, upon the same basis-in
Minnesota upon valuation basis. We
pretend here to follow the constitution
and tax all sorts of property--.real and
personal-on ga cash valuation ba-
SIS, but the result, instead of being as
nearly equal as may be, - is go far from
in one county, confessedly worth $75
per acre is assessed perhaps at SIS,
while in another county, land of the
same value is three times as high. Per
sonal property, unfortunate enough (for
the owner) to get on the tax list, is
made to pay at great deal higher pro-
portionate valuation, while fully
three-fourths Of personally escapes pay
ing any taxes, whatever. Personal
property will not be disclosed for tax
purposes as long as our present consti-
tutional out-of-date tax provisions re-
main, to prevent us from exercising
little up-todate wisdom and discretion
in; the methods Of reaching different
kinds Of personal property.
Success in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin for over fifty years has
gotten along admirably under consti
tutional provision even wider open than
the proposed amendment upon which we
are asked, by the practically unanimous
vote of the last legislature, to pass our
considerate and patriotic judgments. It
is to be hoped patriotic taxpayers will
not be stampeded into opposition by
fear that some sinister design is
wrapped up in the proposition sub
mitted. It has been proven by the ex-
perience. of Wisconsin, and of other
states farther: away, that legislatures
can safely and wisely be allowed to ex-
ercise Judgment and discretion as to tax
methods, without legitimate fear of get
ting half so far away from justice and
equality as has proven our sore expert
ence in Minnesota.
"The second objection is that the
provision taxing moneys, credits and in
vestments in stocks and bonds, etc., is
left out Of the proposed amendment.
If even fair amount of such property
had ever been put upon the tax rolls
in Minnesota, there might be some ex-
cuse for this objection. Not one-tenth
or can ever, in the nature of the prop
erty, be reached. Men will not volun-
tarily disclose such property and the
average assessor will not be very &C.
tive in compelling his neighbor to pay
the regular tax rate upon such prop
erty. It is required to be assessed at
its fair value in money. At that rate,
! to put 1t on the assessment roll means
that from one-half to the whole income
taxes. That is not fair and equal, or
q just share Of the tax burdens, called
for by the present constitution. It is
confiscation. The sort of property men,
toned can be reached upon an income
basis, in fair and equitable way, if
We have the necessary constitutional
ground work. Then why not try it,
We cannot possibly get less revenue
than we do now, by such a change.
Those, who have given the matter long
thought, believe we will get many
times as much as now, and in 80 doing
lessen the burden upon real estate
which now pays very much more than
it's proportion.
'The third objection urged is that
the proposed amendment will permit the
legislature to allow loans, notes, dues
Of banks, ETC., to escape entirely. They
certainly almost wholly escape now. For
the same reason I have mentioned last
above, property-owners will not volun-
tarily disclose them, and the average
citizen will recognize the unfairness Of
taxing them upon a valuation basis.
Inheritance Tax Not Repealed.
"The fourth objection is that the
inheritance tax was left out in the pro-
posed amendment It was left out ad-
vlsedly. It never ought to have been
put in the constitution. It was put in
thru Misunderstanding Of the law, and
Of the real purpose of inheritance taxes.
They are simply a license which the
| government has q right, without men
tion in the constitution, to charge be-
fore it will consent to the transfer of
the property Of g. decedent. It is a
right inherent in all governments. The
legislature will have the same right to
pass Inheritance tax laws, if the pro-
posed amendment is ratified, that it had
last session. =
"The last objection urged is that the
proposed amendment repeats the So
called section II of article TX, and SO
does away with a chance to have graded
or progressive taxes upon certain cor
porate and other property. The legis-
lsture will have the right to provide