Bisbee daily review., 1913-04-01

! at the present session of the legisla
 tue, and that. for several reasons l would be unfortunate.
 | The senate finance comuittee has l introduced Bill No. 162, the mine taz tlll proposed and recommended by the [ tax conimsson. IL proposes a basis oi 1 assessing on net and gross produc, iion, which, it is estimated, will raise the valGaticE of all mining property { i1 the state more than S1CS .000 COG. 1 Bill No 1G3, also introduced at the instance of the tax commission. pro sides for the Finlay method, in force in Michigan, of assessing mines, on | saiua,ions determined b. expert ex- animation. This bill was introduced Hith notation that the commissions CTS recommend it's passage in case No. l62 fails to become d law. wLich would indicate that the commission has nc fixed opinion as to the best method Of assessing mines. It is es- timated that it would cost something i like S5e,00e a year to carry out the provisions of this bill ana non-pro- dueiGg mines would escape taxation entirely under this system.
 Senator Sims introduced No. 164, which provides that the valuation of a producing mine shall be aj per cent of it's gross production plus twice its net production and the physical value of it's Improvements. Patented non producing mines under this bill are to be assessed at $100 per acre, and for their improvements. Unpatented non. producing mines would be assessed fer their Improvements alone. The enactment oi any one of these bills would greatly increase the rev enue derived from the taxation 0! mining property. Tie Sims bill ap- pears to be the most equitable of the three. A sharp contest Is expected over these measures. which may de- feat any legislation for the taxing of mines. In that event the tax com mission might be clothed with extra ordinary powers under the bill adopted by the senate, which not only leaves the commission to devise it's own methods for determining prop srty valuations, but apprCpriates as much money as may be required for that purpose The Bisbee Review in a well considered editorial un the tax ing of mines, says:
 We believe that every act of every public official, high or low, should be In accordance with some written law and are opposed 10 any official com mission or beard being clothed vita authority to perform duties in ac- cOrdaIce with their own opinion with ont any restraint"
 Not only would the tax commission
 
 ate measure 10 fix the valuation on mining property ;the taxlHg of all other classes of property oy the com mission !s contemplated County as- sessOrs and county boards of super sisors would be shorn of all duties in the matter of fixing assessed vaiua- ions. except those ordered by the tax commission.
 IL Is understandable. except from he standpoint of extreme seifshness, Eby thore should be hostility toward
 he mining industry by any class or
 0mmunity in Arizona, yet it has been yeTy apparent in the discussion of the subject of mine taxation in the legis- lature, and is known to exist in sgri- cultural communities. We think it can he truthfully said that the mining in- iastry is the chief basis of Arizona's Industrial prosperity and directly or indirectly. contributed 10 the support of mere than half the population of he state Close our mines and reduc-
 ion works and we would witness a forced higera from our cities towns and cultivated valleys that would leave them silent and tehantless. ane Arizona's vaunteG weath and civil izaticn would soon be onlg memory.