The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1912-12-13
DAVIS HAS PLAN
Auditor Would Save $4,000 a
Year for State.
Make Companies Pay Royalty
for Use of Sand From Rivers.

State Auditor w. z. Davis, in his
recommendations to the legislature,
proposes a most feasible plan for saw
ing s5O000 a year to the state in the
general effort to find relief from the
present oppressive tax system. Davis
has discovered that a number of sand
companies along the banks of the Kan
Sas and Arkansas river are waxing
fat through the sale of sand from these
navigable streams. The sand belongs
to the state. Yet these companies pay
the state nothing. Davis plan may
not win any Christmas gifts from the
sand companies, but it will put $50,000
a year into the state treasury
For a number of years string of
corporations in the sand business, have
been taking sand from the beds of the
Kansas and Arkansas rivers. Davis
has learned that 100000 cubic yards
of sand are taken annually from these
streams. The sand is sold to the pub
lie at the highest market prices and
the state gets nothing. AS the present
market price, sand is worth about 80
cents a cubic yard. If the state was
abIeto collect a royalty of four cents
a cubic yard for the sand taken from
the bed of these streams, it would net
$50,0O0 year.
1t has been rumored in Kansas that
the sand companies doing business
have merged into a gigantic sand
trust. This rumor may or may not |
be true. But the sand companies have /
done a most profitable business.
In Topeka two big sand dredges are
taking sand from the Kaw river bot
tom. At Lawrence are as many more.
There is another at Manhattan and
four more at the mouth of the Kaw
in Kansas City, Kan. Along the Ar
kansas at Hutchinson, Wichita and
other towns, the sand business has be-
come a big, profitable institution. Yet
no one ever raised a question that the
state of Kansas had a just and equita-
BILE claim to some of the profits of this
mammoth business Year after year
the property owners went about their
daily affairs. paid their taxes on their
visible assets and the sand companies
continued to give these sand COM
panies all the sand they could take
from the beds Of the streams.
Now Davis plans a relief. There are
a dozen other reliefs promised from as
many sources-each reducing the state
except to the people who gain the
profits In addition to the millions of
tons of sand that have been taken
from the beds of the navigable streams
of the state. much gravel had also been
hauled and this, too. mas resulted in
great pTOnIS TO the men VINO QdQ Cn6 !
foresight to take possession of this |
property. But never one dollar has |
the state received for this privilege.
In his recommendations to the leg |
islature. as affecting the sand problem, |
Davis says:
THE beds of the Kansas and Arkansas |
rivers are rich in deposits of sand and |
Gravel 1t is conservatively estimated |
that every year 100000 cubic yards of |
sard are taken from the beds of these |
streams as well as several hundred thou
sand cubic yards of gravel. This sand /
and gravel belongs to the state. Most of |
/ is appropriated by large companies and |
corpora tions who make large profits from
its sale-yet the state gets nothing. If |
the state eXacted a royalty from the COM
panies handling this sand and gravel i,
would easily produce an income of fifty |
dollars a year This could be
placed to the credit of the general reve-
nue. fund or to the permanent school
fund. Upon investigation, / find that the
state of Oklahoma is now proposing to
utilize the sand and gravel beds of the
Arkansas river to augment the revenues |
Of that state. I would suggest that the
same act that provides for a survey and
sale of lands in navigable rivers should |
also provide a plan for the collection of a |
ROYALTY of not less than four cents per
cubic yard on the gross output of sand |
and gravel taken from the navigable |
streams of Kansas"