The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1907-02-21

Annexed hereto is the bill intro
duced in the legislature by Hon. II. o.
Bjorge of Becker county which pro-
vides for a tax of five cents per ton on
all iron ore mined within the state,
the proceeds of which tax is to be de-
voted to the drainage of state swamp
lands and the improvement, of the
public highways ,of the state 10 per
cent for drainage and 80 per cent for
public highways. The text of the bill
published herewith is altogether diff
ferent from the original bill intro
duced by Mr.. Bjorge. We believe this
is a fair measure-fair to the iron
companies, fair to st. Louis county
and fair to the state. The Union
would not for a moment champion a
measure that was prejudicial, to the
interests of any part of St. Louis
county. St. Louis county is part and
parcel Of the great state of Minnesota
and is entitled to as much considera-
ton as any other county of the state.
The Bjorge bill leaves St. Louis
county and the minor political subdi-
visions thereof in exactly the same
condition they are at present so far as
the taxation of mineral lands is con-
cerned. The bill does not in any
manner interfere with the direct valu-
alton taxes paid by the owners of min
eral land and producing mines. It
simply provides for the payment Of a
state tax of FIVE cents per ton on all
ore mined in the state in lieu of all
other state taxes.
The bill. we believe, is constitu-
tional, and if any litigation should
ensue it would not affect the direct
valuation tax. The tonnage tax
might be declared void but the direct
valuation tax would stand, hence the
range towns of St. Louis county have
nothing to fear from the passage of
the Bjorge bill.
The Union does not now and
never has favored purely tonnage
tax. Such a tax would work an in
justice to the range towns sooner or
later, no matter what proportion of
the tonnage tax was refunded to the
towns. Because there would come
years when ore would not be mined in
certain districts and there would be
no taxes to refund in those districts.
For the protection of the range towns
the direct valuation tax must be main
tanned.
The bill is fair to the mining COM
panies. A five cent per ton tax is not
exorbitant. With a five cent per ton
tax for state purposes on producing
mines in addition to the direct valua-
ton tax for local purposes the rate
will not be more than the average rate
of taxation on other classes of prop
erty throughout the state. The pro-
posal to fix a tonnage tax at 25 cents
per ton is absurd. No court in chris
tendon would sustain such tax-it
would be confscatory.
To what better use could the pro-
ceeds of tonnage tax be devoted
than to the Improvement of our public
highways and the reclamation of the
states swamp lands? Surprising
Is, O00, 900 tons are, mined annually, a
tax of five cents per ton would pro-
duce 81, $50, 900, of which, under the
provisions of the bill, S125, 900 would
be expended in retaining the swamp
lands of the state until such time as
they were all reclaimed, and the bal
ance, s1,125,ooo. judiciously applied
to the Improvement of our public
highways under state supervision,
would in the course of decade or two
give us the best system of roads Of
any state in the Union.
There is nothing complicated or.