The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-11-16

al institute at Topeka, western uni
verslty at Quindaro The appropriations
!or these institutions naturally divide
INTO TWO headings first. maintenance.
which is largely salaries; and perma-
nent improvements, which include as
before. the buildings. purchase OF land,
etc The legislature of 1907 appro-
priated for maintenance as above ex
planned, $1,195,261, and the 1903 appro-
priatlonS Tor the same purpose Were
Sl,lOz,011. an increase of $5O6,S2O, Or
about forty-f1ve per cent in the two
years, and as we all understand, tie
larger part of this is salaries Tne
question for the taxpayer is, are we
getting forty-five per cent more gooi
out of the institutions than we did last
year?
Decrease in Permanent improvements
Once again, the permanent I'M
provement appropriations call Tor. an
explanation. In 1907 these institutions
received from the legislature LOT
buildings, purchase OF lano, etc.
$84S,784, and for the same purpose In
1909, $672,2SS, or a decrease of S176,-
496 in permanent improvements 10
verify these figures reference is MADE
to Exhibit c. the session laws mere
tofore referred to.
Let us draw some conclusions.
They are easy The difference in the
total of all these figures for the two
biennial periods is not very great
There is only about $118,00O more ap-
propriated for all of these penal
charitable and educational institutions
for 1903 than for 1907, which SO Tar
shows nothing extraordinary. But
when it is shown that $490,OO0, nearly
half million dollars, were deducted
from permanent Improvements, Iand
and buildings, and with this $1lS,OOo,
placed in running expenses, with rev.
er inmates in the penal and charitable
institutions to support, it is matter
that demands explanation. THESE ng-
ures show not only that the increased
appropriation, except $11S,00U, dlo not
go to the state institutions, but that
these running expenses were increas-
ed about 100000, covered mostly by
reducing permanent Improvements,
and that the statement made by Gov
ernor Stubs that the demand OF state
institutions was so much greater ana
explained the increase, was either
made without proper investigation or
was made to mislead. Where is the in
crease?
Increase for Governors Boards.
Here is big item of it. There are
certain appropriations covered by the
general term Executive and judicial
Appropriations These cover salaries
and expenses of the governors office,
other different state offices and
boards, such as the board OF control,
bank commissioner, text book COM
missioners, and such Officers Th1s
mas always D0SH d ldNOI1tS lCSOoi &c VI
the politician who wanted to organize
well and. build a good machine, for the
officers connected with these boards
and commissions are scattered or
travel over the state.
''The appropriations for this class
of officers for 1907 legislature were
S1,556, 765, and for 1909 legislature
$1,934,196, or an increase of 1917, 431.
In this, however, was an appropria-
ton to the board of control for buying
coal for some of the institutions,
amounting to $1S6,000, which leaves
practically no increase in the judicial
part of this appropriation. The in
crease in the elective officers, such as
treasurer and secretary of state, is
very small, and the attorney generals
office received much more from the
1907 legislature, which Governor
Stubs claims was dominated by such
bad men as Senator Fitzpatrick in
the senate and myself in the house,
than from the 1908 legislature, and
this, additional APPROPRIATION in 1907
was for the purpose of prosecuting
the trusts The only elective board,
the railroad commissioners, was de-
creased in 1909. Practically all of
the $191, 900 increase is to the gov
ernor's office or to the boards which
he appoints or controls, the governors
office alone being raised from $43,830
in 1907, to $57,400 in 1909, an increase
of S13,170, or over twenty-five per
cent. If the administration meas
ures,' such as the public utilities bill,
which provided for more offices, had
passed there would have been much
greater increase for the tax payers to
meet.
I'VE will refer to the auditors fig
ures published October 9, 1909. and
heretofore marked Exhibit B. and the
same facts are found in the session
laws above referred to.
1.-THE total state tax for the whole
state is $3.50, 81 more for the year 1909
than for 1908. See auditors Office or
state treasurer's office to support these
figures. Some of the reasons for such
great increase are found in the
above figures. and there are others.
They Find Exceptions to Rule.
have hunted up certain pieces of land
where the tax is less or at least no
greater than last year. and attempted
to use this to refute the claim that the
state taxes were increased. But a ref
erence to any county treasurer's office
will show that the county pays more
state tax than in 1908. Reno county
paying in round numbers $55,060 in 1908,
and $4,000 in 1909.r and reference to the
auditors office or state treasurer's Of
fee will show that every county pays
more. So If the tax on any piece, of
property is less this year than last,
it is not because state taxes are less,
but because the local officers havesre-
ouced the local tax Ievies so much that
it makes up for the increase in state
taxes-that they have saved at home
and lost at Topeka. The effort to con-
vince people that state taxes are lower
by sucn methods only shows what those
interested will resort to mislead.
These are facts from the records.
Barring some possible slight mistake,
xxhiob nOSSihl6, hut not DrODab BILE.
thew are accurate. It is not hard to
tell where the responsibility rests. The
only question for the taxpayer and the
people to figure out is whether we can
afford this or not. Maybe we cam