West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1915-04-29
kINoWoop. APRIL 2s
EvADES THE ISSUE


Dawson tax laws may still interest the
tax reformers." but the average tax
payer is well aware OF the non-fulfillment
OF said promises. The essential point is,
Did they reduce the taxes Of the farmer,
the mechanic, the merchant and the
small property holder as guaranteed by
the tax reformers2' THE ARGUS claims
they have not and it challenges Senator
Flynn TO produce the tax receipts to
prove the contrary. The Senator side
steps and evades the question, which is,
Has the Dawson tax laws reduced taxa
ton as promised?
The Senator calls attention to the tax
commission appointed by Gov. A. b.
White, which consisted OF two Democrats
and three Republicans, and AYERS that
the report and recommendations OF this
commission ''were enacted without ma
terial change into what are known as
the Dawson tax laws Such an aver
ment might 90 unchallenged if the
records were destroyed.
After almost two years OF laborious and
painstaking investigation of the laws OF
other states the commission submitted its
report and recommendations. But the
report OF the commission did not suit the
tax reformers." Then, as now, there
was fierce factional fight raging be-
tween the "Stalwarts' and "Halfbreeds, /"
as they were then called. After wrang-
ling and hacking for some time the tao
tons got together and appointed COM
mittee to revise the report of the tax
commission and agree upon a tax bill
THAT would be satisfactory to both fac
<tions and the public be damned This
Is what they did, and it took the Re-
publican committee about six hours to
prepare tax bill which it took the tax
commission almost two years to prepare.
When the Republican committee got
through with the tax commissions tax
bill it was so different from the original
that the gentlemen composing the COM
mission declared they could not recog-
nize their child. No one is more familiar
with the facts than Senator Flynn. This
lie why the abortion is stigmatized "tax
REFORM
We would like for Senator FLYNN to
give us bill OF particulars; in other
words, to introduce the evidence, sup
: ported by the record, to sustain his in
dictment OF the Democratic members OF
the legislative session of 1911. He was a
member of that august body and one oil
fifteen who could have blocked any legis-
lation CATER returning from Cincinnati
that did not meet their approval. Be.
sides, Gov. Glasscock could have exer-
cised the power of veto and the Demo
Gratis would have been powerless to pass
1t over Il e veto with the senate a tie.
The changes made in the Dawson tax
laws in 1911 have never been repealed.
The changes must have some merit in
them or they would have been repealed
Changing the assessment from January |
to April i was a great benefit to the
farmer. Did the Senator vote against it?
The Democrats by exercising economy in
the session Of 1911 were able 70 reduce
the state tax to ONE cent, which pro-
duced enough revenue to run the state
government. Two years later the Re-
publicans increased it to TEN cents and
plunged the state hopelessly into debt.
Senator Flynn has failed to explain this.
There is one item in 'tax reform" that
the Senator is loath to revert to. The
promise was that in 1909 the state tax
would be abolished. What happened?
Why, that was the year the farmer got il
In the neck and he rebelled. Many OF
the farmers tax receipts trebled and
quadrupled in 1908; in other words, their
tax receipt for 1909 was THREE and
FOUR times more in 1909 than in 1908.
And there has been a steady increase
ever since. Let the Senator explain why.
1t is not what Senator Flynn or TIE
ARGUS thinks, but it is what the tax
payers think Of the increase in their tax
receipt that counts. Members Of the
Republican party have charged the state
administration with "wasteful extraya-
gance in the administration Of state sf-
fairs" THE ARGUS has submitted figures
10 prove extravaganza, just exactly what
the Dawson tax laws were intended 10
provide for.
From 1904 10 1914 the salaries Of the
state house officials and their current ex.
peDses increased from 500, 900 a year n
1896, 900 a year. During the same period
\ new Offices were created, which, together
with their cdnent expenses for 1914,
amounted to 500, 900, making totaI
annual increase in maintaining the state
house Offices Of $357, 900 more in 1914
than 1904. Does even Senator Flynn, a.
a business man, believe that an increase
Of 1851 900 in ten years for maintaining
the state house offices is q legitimate in
crease7 IL there taxpayer in Preston
county who believes that the business Of
this state has grown 80 great in ten years
ne 10 Justify the increase Of salaries from
100000 a year 10 1851, 900 a year? The
Last session Of the legislature, which was
overwhelmingly Republican, created new
Offices that will cost AZ least $1,000 a
year, which will increase the total 10
e457 900 in eleven years.
A senator declared from the floor Of
The senate, and IL was not challenged by
any Of the spokesmen Tor the state adj
rninistration, that the expenses connected
with The regular session Of the legislature
was an outrage, "because for every dol
Tar drawn BY members Of the senate dur
ing the regular session the attaches drew