Weekly Arizona journal-miner., 1907-03-06

the world that our mines are enor. mously valuable. Are they of purely speculative value. Is if true that Ari. zona's mines are fraud delusion and n snarel Is it true of our great producing mines that there is no fair prospect of their lasting beyond the current year!
 ls fl trnc that mining am not speaking of prospecting in Arizona is purely gamble, with chances SO slight that we dare not 20 beyond one. fifth of their annual bullion product. as the utmost estimate of their value, 1, Shall we advertise the fact that our mines are SO short lived that to 20 beyond 2 single year in estimating their value is unjust, unfair and un. warranted by the facts,
 There is but one reason given by the advocates of the bill No. iJ why the rule of a fifth or any other frac. ton of the gross products should he applied to mines and not to other property. and that is. the uncertainty of the life of the mines.
 lt has been said that no man can see ahead of inc drill. and that the next shot in n mine may discover that it is exhausted. We must admit this to be true just as we must admit that any proposition is true that asserts a DOS. sibility, if the proposition is not con. tradictory in itself.
 II has been asserted that thousands of dollars have been expended in min. ing operations in this Territory that have been utterly lost. This is con. ccded, but I do not see that that is relevant to the taxation of the prop erty in which money is invested and which is profitable. We do not pro pose to tax those who invested and lost It is again asserted as reason for putting mines in a specially fa. forcd class that more money has been invested than has been rcturned-,hat may be true, but l do not believe it and it is not those who have SO lost that are here urging that argument.
 One of my objections to Council Bill No. iJ is that it is unfair, m just and unequal to apply the rule of fix. ing the valuation of mines by talk. ing onc-fifth of their annual product ns their value unless the same rule k applied tO all other kinds of property the establishment of different rules makes equality impossible.
 have the further objection that even as among producing mines the rule laid down in that bill will incvi. tahly work gross inequality. l need not more than suggest to you that a mine yielding per cent copper ore is not worth nearly onc.half aa much as one that yields q per cent copper ore, even if all other things were equal and the gross bullion output bc iden. ticnlly the same
 l need not more than further sug. gcst that some mines are producing and are paying from even as high as % or even loo per cent profit, while others are producing at n loss. Coun- cil bill No. iJ permits of no adjust. mcnt of these gross inequalities. Ad. mi'tedly. the mine producing at n loss and the one producing at % or loo per cent profit, although their product may equal in value, are not of the same valuc. Some opportunity ought to he afforded to adjust this incqual. ity-but Council bill No. ij prevents il.
 If it be said that it is because of the improvements upon non'producing mines that they are taxed s6.OOO,0 ,0OO, still think it unfair. think 1 may say that machinery upon an uudevol. Opcd, nproducing mine K not of the same value as that on e mine that is being profitably operated, even though the machinery on both may be iden- tical in kind. extent and character.
 But if the object of fixing upon n percentage of production is to secure uniformity of valuation of mining property, which, of course, it does not do, that object could just as well bc accomplished by taking %, 75, loo per cent of, or twice. or thrice, ar any number of times the value of the an. nual production as it could by taking 20 per cent of it.
 The proposition to assess producing mines at onc.fif'h of their annual bull. lion product is, l think, therefore, to summarize, unfair:
 list. As to all other classes of prop erty because the like rule of taking onc-fiftb of the gross annual product as its valuation is not applied to other property. ..
 End. Because if is an unequal rule ns applied to producing mines them. selves. for the value of property is not deicrminable alone from gross products or given parts of gross prod ucts, but upon relative profits. This rule may result in the valuation of producing mines ni equal sums. when in fact they may bear the relation of l to 10 or more; in fact, that is, one may he assessed relatively at ten times as much as another. and there is not only no remedy for this by Council bill No. i5, but that bill pre-