Five Mile Beach weekly journal., 1909-01-22
run very uniform for the past six
years.
From 1908 to 1908, inclusive, these
were as follows:

BILE income for the state that can meet
increasing demands, except it come
from these two sources, or the railway
tax be entirely abandoned and a direct
state tax substituted.
If the direct state tax method be
adopted then, of course, chapter 146
of the laws of 1906, which directs the
payment of all the tax on main stem,
personal property and franchises of
the railways, in excess of the amount
produced by one-half of l per cent,
to the counties for apportionment
among the school districts falls, and
all school taxes, except the present
direct state tax for school purposes of
2A mills, will be required to be raised
locally.
The state will. under the direct tax
system, collect only sufficient taxes to
meet the demands of the state govern
ment.
There has been much agitation in the
state for the taxation of railroad prop
erty locally at local rates, and if we
are to come to a state tax that should
DC oOANs CIdCA a AilCNt ctdtC TIA "
state purposes it would seem that it
must be done, because otherwise there
is no Reuse for the present system of
a railway taxation. When that sys-
tenn was devised in 1884 it was to re-
lieve the individual property of the
state from any state tax and to sup
port the state government by a tax on
20 i11sna1 npNrnpfF an1ry ~ IN 100E fhn
system devised in 1884 had worked
well. Every thoughtful man must ad-
NIT it has been a good system. Under
the acts of 1905 and 1906, known as
the Duffield and Perkins acts respec-
lively, large increases in taxation
rightly occurred in both first and sec
ond class property. In 1905 the tax
on the main stem, tangible personal
property and the franchises of rail
ways alone produced 1920, GA. "A, and
yet the state for it's uses and purposes
received less than 100000 more in
1908 than it did in 1885 from this class
of property.
Prior to 1906 the tax on the main
stem, tangible personal property and
franchises was limited to one-half of
1 per centum, and that year it was
raised to the average tax rate through
out the state. Notwithstanding all
this increase in the rate chapter 146
of the laws of 1906 expressly limits
the state for all time to so much of
the railway taxes as will be produced
by one-half of l per centum-that is,
no -aa4%o- AArrv fI.A e4aAA IN.
population, in the needs for its courts,
in its penal and charitable institutions,
in the legislature and in it's many de-
IpartmeHrs its revenue must remain
stationary. No more, no less, as the
years go on.
l am opposed to a direct state tax
If the act of 1906 can be repealed or
modified; otherwise | recommend a
direct tax for state purposes and the
abolition of our present railroad taxa
ton system and the taxation of all
railway property of every class locally
at local rates and for local purposes.
The recommendation for a direct
state tax for state purposes is not
made because l believe it wise, but
because chapter 146 of the laws of
1906 has made this course absolutely
necessary if hat law is to stand I'M
modified or u%nrepealed.
From the tax of 1908 on the assessed
value of the main stem, tangible per-
sonal property and franchises of the
railways, at the average rate of 1908,
over $3,200,000 was produced, but
about $2,230,000 of this sum must be
drawn from the state treasury for To-
cal distribution under chapter 146 of
the laws of 1906, no matter what the
needs of the state may be.
No cause seems to have existed for
the passage of this act that is founded
either in reason or a sound public pol
icy. In fact it's provisions are in exact
conflict with section l of chapter 4O1
of the laws of 1895 and directly OPP
posed to the state policy declared in
that act and in every appropriation
act passed from 1895 to 1906, all of
which declared hat no funds should
be paid out of the treasury of the
state except such as were annually
appropriated by law.
These acts enunciate the right pol
icy. No act should ever be passed
forestalling the action of a future leg
lslature. All such legislation only m
barasses the state financially and pro-
notes no good end. Every just claim
upon the state treasury can safely rely
upon a fair consideration at the hands
Of the legislature.
The act of 1906 has answered no use
full purpose. Nothing has been done
under it that would not have been
done without it.
There is no lack of money coming
into the treasury. In fact, there is a
large surplus ove all necessities If the
limitation on its use by chapter 146
of the act y 1906 were removed. If
this act of 1906 were modified or re-
pealed the legislature could provide for
NIL tha reasonable and necessary needs