Arizona republican., 1907-03-02


 equality in my annual report for 1906 and again. l called your specific atten- ton to 1t in my message to you at the opening of your session. l have not only talked of 1t. but have endeavored, and with considerable success at least contributed to the amelioration of this injustice. I cannot refrain from an expression
 of my appreciation of the solicitude of of those representing the large produc- ing mines for the welfare of the non- producers.
 I am fully aware of the vicissitudes that attend the efforts of the prospect or. l recognize the courage, the en- durance. the fidelity and the persist ence of the men who hunt the hills and spy out the riches: riches of which they SO seldom reap any Of the bene- fits. We are all willing to pay a yer
 bal tribute to the pioneer and yet with
 hold simple justice. We have been in
 the habit of taxing his patented min ing claim though it may have been un- developed and unproductive, and not withstanding it had no value that was determinablc and taxing it at the same valuation as the patented mines out Of which the owner was taking hun dreds of thousands of dollars yearly. l think no one will say that that was just. I am sure that 1t is not. l have insisted that mines should. like any other property. be assessed at their value: when that shall be done. then justice will be done to the owner of the undeveloped, unproductive mine. to the owner of the developed, productive mine, and as well to the owners of all other property-and not until then. IL is the duty of the assessor if he find that a patented mine is undevelop- ed. unproductive and has no value to assc ss at only a nominal sum. That has always been his duty however much it may have been neglected.
 And if in your judgment legislation is either needed or is desirable to pro- tect the owner of mines not demon strable to have any value by enacting that a patented mine. undeveloped. un- productive and having no demonstra- ible value shall be assessed for only a nominal sum-say not to exceed $lOO.OJ - will with pleasure sign such a bill If such mines lie idle, as they may because oi the inability of the owner to develop them, the territory is not injured for the ore will remain there to await the process of development and the mine then becomes one having a demOnstrable value, to the advantage of the owner and of the territory.
 | do not think the intelligent owners of the undeveloped mines of this terri tory will insist that the only protect ! ton is the exemption of large mines from the greater share of their taxes. | The proper rule is that both shoJ-d be assessed at their just valuation.
 ] But l have other objections to COun- cil Bill No. 45:
 l 1st. It does not provide for the taxa | ton of a mine the owner or operator i of which does not reduce the ore to bullion. Read carefully the statement provided for in Section of Council ] Bill No. 45. It provides that the owner shall state the amount and character of the ore and the yield-not of its as- say contents. but what may have been 1 the actual yield. which is measured as pounds or ounces of metal actually pro-
 duced How can the mine owner who
 does not reduce his ores tell what the
 yield is any more than the farmer can
 tell the yield of flour from the wheat
 he has sold to the miller? It is no
 answer to say that most miners do re-
 duce the ores. and that those who do
 not. get shelter returns. It is easy enough to change that rule. IL is not any more necessary that the mining corporation should reduce their
 ores than it is that they should
 build railways to ship their
 supplies and products. One corpo-
 ration could mine the ores and an- other corporation smelt them. albiet the
 stockholders of both might be the same sjJtst as a mining exploration may carry on the operation of a mine and another corporation. composed of the same
 stockholders. might build and operate
 a railroad for the sole convenience of
 the mining corporation. Then again
 ask how can the owner of a mine who
 does not produce bullion make a re-
 turn of that bullion? Section pro-
 vides the form of assessment list, but
 that list is made up from the state
 ments provided for by section and can contain nothing that is not taken
 from those statements. But section tells us how we shall value the product ana We are lO llidN lllFAiAoh
 The assessor. that section says, shal
 base the value of the products upor
 the average quotations of each of sucf
 products in New York City. What products? The value of copper. gold !. silver. etc, of course. and of course
 not of the quotations in the New Yorl l City market Of copper ores. or copper matte. or of copper concentrates nor o
 gold or silver ores or concentrated ores
 Tax laws are strictly construed; ther, is no liberality in broadening theiI
 terms: the courts construe them ac' cording to the letter and not their in
 tent, if that be not fairly expressed
 How could we tax our mines if thel
 should ship their ores or concentrates
 2nd. Again. I object to it because i exempts from taxation the machinery 1 and other improvements on producin!
 mines used in mining.
 If you will read section :, you vii