The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1911-02-11
John Dawson and Charles Ses-
sion Issue Address.
Tell Why Corporation Law
Should Be Adopted.
MODEL OF BREVITY.
Document Clearly Set Forth
Arguments for Measure.
Still Has a Chance Before the
Legislature.
MODEL OF BREVITY.

Charles Sessions. secretary of state,
and John 8. Dawson, attorney gen
eral, are still fighting for the passage
of the corporation tax bill that re-
ceived black eye in the senate at the
hands of the senators with corpora
tion leanings. These two state Of
ficials have prepared remarkable
brief in which is set forth the pur-
poses and benefits of the bill and the
objections thereto and answers these
objections.
This is a newspaper mans brief and
therefore commended for its clear
ness and simplicity and brevity. Daw-
son also has newspaper style OF
writing and the legal points therefore
as plain and direct as the statement of
facts. This brief is sure to prove a
strong argument for the bill, the
measure has still good chance of be-
ing enacted into a law by this legis-
lature.
The following extracts from the
brief set forth its main object:
No Cause for Excitement.
This bill has created more excite
ment than any other bill pending in
the legislature when it should have
created the least.
When the full import of the bill is
explained to corporation men, even
those who protest, usually withdraw
their objections to the principle of 1t
and simply urge that the annual fee
be made as low as possible.
The object of this bill is to enable
the state to receive some revenue
from a source that now pays none
and thereby relieve the burden OF the
people generally to some extent.
If the Ohio rate is adopted, it will
reduce the state taxes one-twelfth.
Nhv the Protests Came.
When this bill was introduced in
the legislature several Topeka corpor-
atoms became unduly excited. They
threw a scare into corporations over
the state and in turn those corpora
lions tried to stampede the legislature
against the bill with their protests
The corporations had a constitu-
tional right to protest and their pro-
tests should be given consideration.
But that doesn't necessarily mean that
those protests should govern. Please
don't mistake those protest as the
voice of the entire people.
The corporations having had their
say, we desire to have ours. All we
ask ia that the legislature, represent
ing the people, as it does. give this bill
a full and fair consideration upon
its merits.
Object of Bill.
Most of the bills introduced in the
legislature carry some provision for
taking money out of the public treas
ury. This bill seeks to put some
money into the treasury.
Many States Have Similar Laws.
More than thirty states of this Union
have laws providing for an annual
franchise tax or license fee on private
corporations. Therefore, the charge
made by certain corporations that this
is a Populistic measure and an inno-
walton in legislation is not true.
Pay for Its Advantage.
The claim is made by some that this
bill hurts a corporation whose rival in
business is an individual or partner
ship. We don't think so.
That corporation now has an adj
vantage over its rival through its
privilege of perpetuity and limited liza
bility and this bill makes it pay some
thing for that advantage.
State Creates Corporations.
The state is the creator-the moth
er-of corporations, and after it
creates them it gets no more fees out
of them. When corporation secures
a charter it goes into some town to
d business and quite frequently an
occupation tax is levied against it by
the town. The federal government
comes along and taxes its profits.
Everybody, it seems, gets fees from it
ment last year collected $4,000 from
corporations in Kansas. 1t seems rea-
sonable that If anyone is to get any
fees out of corporations, it surely
should be the state which creates
them.
Amount Corporations Would Pay.
The following shows the amount of
the annual fee a corporation would
pay the state under either the Ohio