New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1909-01-13
POWER ENLARGED
Wide-open Tax Amendment De.
clared to Be a Part of State
Constitution.
Decision One of the Most Far
reaching Ever Rendered by
Minnesota's Supreme Court.


Minnesota's Supreme Court.
The wide.open tax amendment,
which was voted on at the general
election two years ago but which has
been prevented from becoming a part
of the constitution of the state because
of question as to its adoption, was on
Friday, in a decision of the supreme
court reversing the opinion of the
st. Louis county district court, de-
clared to have been duly adopted.
The decision is one of the most i'm
portant ever rendered by a Minnesota
appellate court, involving as it does
the constitutionality of the mortgage
registry tax law and the creation of
the tax commission and incidentally
paving the way for sweeping legisla-
tlon along taxation lines.
Judge Elliott, who writes the opin-
ion, recognizes this Importance when
he says:
''The question presented is of very
great Importance and the results of
the decision will be far-reaching. It
will determine the power of the legis-
lature over methods of taxation, and
thus vitality affect the future develop
ment Of the commonwealth and the in
dividual interests of every Citizen
AS the constitution stood from the
organization of the state all taxes
were required to be raised under the
system known as the general property
tax. Dissatisfaction with the results
of this method and the development
of more scientific and satisfactory
methods of raising revenue induced
the legislature to submit to the people
an amendment to the constitution
which provided merely that taxes
should be uniform upon the same
class OF subjects.
The new amendment provides that
the power of taxation shall never be
surrendered, suspended or contracted
away. Taxes shall be uniform upon
the same class of subjects, and shall
be levied and collected for public pur-
poses, but public burying grounds,
public school houses, public hospitals,
academies, colleges, universities, and
all seminal of learning, all church
es, church property, and houses of
worship, Institutions of purely public
charity and pubic property used ex-
clusively for any public purpose,
shall be exempt from taxation, and
there may be exempted from taxation
personal property not exceeding in
value 5000, for each household, indi-
vidual or head of a family, as the leg
islature may determine: Provided,
that the legislature may authorize
municipal corporations to levy and
collect assessments for local improve
ments upon property benefited thereby
without regard to cash valuation,
and, provided further, that nothing
in the amendment shall be construed
to affect, modify or repeal any exist
ing law providing for the taxation of
the gross earnings of railroads.
The amendment is really the fruit of
the labors of the temporary tax COM
mission created by the legislature of
1901 and which consisted of W. j..
Hahn of Minneapolis and Gideon Ives
and H. w. Childs Of St. Paul. This
| commission reported a new tax code
to the special session of 1902, but de-
clared that any system under the old
constitution was unscientifc and out
of date. They submitted new consti-
tutional provision to take the place of
five long sections. This was known
as the wide-open amendment The
legislature submitted this to the
people, but it failed to get majority
In 1905 a similar amendment was
submitted and was voted on at the
general election the year following.
This is the one which was declared by
the supreme court on Friday to have
carried. A contest was instituted
| against it by interested st. Louis
county parties in December, 1906, and
has been pending for two years, the
contestants claiming that votes count.
| ed for the wide-open tax amendmen,
] had really been cast for the gooo
roads amendment. A recount Of the
returns of several counties was made
| with the result thatthe tax amendment
1 lost Is, 337 votes and the good roads
amendment gained in the same ratio
The district judge thereupon held thu
tax amendment lost and the goot
, roads amendment carried.
The supreme court, however, can
; not arrive at such conclusion