The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1909-01-08
SENDsOUT MESSAGE
CONTINUED From Page One.l

sSSteui as d substitute for the pldn
now in vogue, which consists of town
snip and city assessors. The office
should be under the direction or SUI
pervision of the tax commission, SO
that some general plan might be
worked out which would be uniform
throughout the state.
Taxation of Corporations.
AS set forth by the tax commission
the taxation of corporations is not
satisfactorily accomplished under the
present law. largely because the lists
now required of these organizations
do not harmonic with legal condi
lions. The enactment of a law pro-
viding for more extended list of
queries is important and essential to
larger returns and better enforce
ment of the law.
Of particular moment is that chap
Aer of the commissions Sort in
which is discussed the question of the
gross earnings tax of railways. The
state now receives over $4,000, 900 an
sually in railway taxes and If the re-
rent decision of the court in the gross
earnings tax suit is sustained the
amount now received will be in
creased by about 100000, as by it's
provisions all of the roads must pay
per cent gross earnings tax. While
the amount now received is large it is
pointed out by the commission that
under an ad valorem basis, uniform
and equal with other property in the
state, the present rate of 4 per cent
does not meet the requirements nee
essary to equal taxation.
In the matter of the assessment of
personal property the law establishes
an arbitrary personal property list.
Expansion from time to time has
made the list a complicated one and
because it has been arbitrary it has
resulted in at least the occasional
omission of property which should be
listed. In view of the changes which
possibly may be necessary the COM
mission should be given the power to
extend or decrease the list of items
as eXigency may necessitate.
Taxation of Iron Properties.
During the earlier years of the state
our natural resources were largely
agricultural and forest. Recently,
however, we have grown to be the
first mining state of the Union and
our almost phenomenal sudden growth
in this field has made the question of
the taxation of iron ore one of the ut
most Importance and of our graveSt
concern. In the past twenty-four
year; the state has pursued two sys-
tens for the taxation of iron. For
eleven years during the infancy of the
Industry tonnage tax of l cent per
ton was imposed, one-half of which
Iem;ined in the state treasury, the
othe half being returned to the coun-
ty treasurer The net amount re-
ceived by the state during that period
was S4S 453.77. For thirteen years
iron taxation has been upon an ad
valoem basis and the amount re-
ceived by the state has grown from
S11,572.33 in 1896 to S661 200 in 1907
and 1894 in 1908. 1t is not my
purpose at this time to discuss the
merits of either the ad valorem or ton
portsnt matter | believe that it is not
question of systems so much as that
the mining properties should pay their
full and just share of the taxes. In
the consideration of this question one
point must never be lost sight of: The
counties, cities, towns and school dis
trlcts in the mining districts must
never he deprived of their full share
of the tax levied and any plan which
would deprive them in any measure
of their just share of reliable and con-
tinuous revenues could not be enter
tanned, as it would be unfair. unjust
unwise and unworthy of the state.
Awaiting Courts Decision.
have refrained from discussion
of the two systems of taxation for the
present because of the uncertain state
in which we find ourselves and may
avail myself of future opportunity for
further discussion of this question
in special message. Previously, I'M
der our constitution as it stood for
nearly quarter of century, ton
mage tax could not be imposed. The
legislature, by an act approved April
Is, 1905, proposed to the people of
the state for their approval or rejec-
tion an amendment to article of the
constitution, which was known as the
wide open tax amendment, and which,
if approved by the people, would have
given to the legislature wider latitude
than it then enjoyed. The state can
vassing board declared said amend
ment adopted and a proclamation by
the governor was accordingly made.
A partial recount of the vote was had
and in the district court judgment
was entered declaring the amendment
lost. Appeal was taken to the supreme
court, where the matter is still pend
ing, but from which a decision will be
handed down during this legislative
session and in season for such action
in all the premises as your body may
desire.
If it should be decided by the SUI
preme court that the amendment has
prevailed then the way is open to this
legislature for such legislation as it
may desire to enact. If the decision
is otherwise then further discussion
of tonnage tax at this session would