The Madison daily leader. [volume] (Madison, S.D.) 1890-current, 1918-05-24

The chief business of the country now is to win the war and secur
an honorable and permanent peace. We are gOng % win the a The
only question is as to how W shall secure the money to finance it,
We must remember that property is subject to the call of the nation
as well Is men, and especially re should remember that those who are
Looming large fortunes off of this war should be required Ito give freely of
their war profits in this time of need.
The greatest fortunes ever known re being coined out of the var
conditions. h profits of Of the big corporations are almost n
belevabbe.
For instance, the net profits Of the U. S steel Corporation arr nearly
800 per cent; Armour & Co, $50 per cent and Swift & Co. nearly 400
per cent greater than before the war.
Relative increase in profits of other corporations are greater ever
than these. We read of the rapid increase of milIonaires in the country,
Revenue Department show that there arr now about 400 people each of
whom enjoy a income of more than $lOOO,oOO a year.
should be heavily taxed to provide event At least rs or 80 per
cent should have been taken as war tax
When the Revenue Bill was before the Senate there was a determined
effort OF the part o a number Of Senators, Republican and Democrats, to
failed though they presented unanswerable arguments sin behalf of such
Senator Sterling persisenty voted against every proposal to lay an
adequate tax o swollen incomes and "a profits, thus voting to generously
In the case of the U. S. steel Corporation this excess is nearly or
quite 100000 10000 s 1oOO,0OOOo for every working day in the year
The law seems to be designed to favor the large corporations with
great aggregaions Of capital, and bears heavily m the small corporation
whose chief asset is the industry and energy of the owners.
Take Armour & Co. Last yea their var profts-the excess over
their peace time earnngs-amounted to $17 100000 90. This should be
taxed at son definite rate, probably at about 80 per cent as in England,
but ats some adequate rate. But it was not.
The president Of Armour & Co, as reported in the Public Press. in a
statement accompanying the annual report said:
The net of s2l,29s.562.s7 is equivalent tic 21 pei cent of
our capital stock and 14.5 per cen o the average net capital
investment. The usual dividend of 2 per cent has sheen declared,
payable January 18th, 1918, the balance of the years earnings
reinvested lin the business"
The law provides that that part of the net income in excess Of ts
deduction and not exceeding Is per cent of the invested capitalv shall
be taxed 20 Der cent; inasmuch as this companys profits are held to be
only 145 per cent oft the met invested capital it is required to pav only
20 per cent oil my part of its "a profits, and it is allowed to deduct an
amount equal to z per cent of its invested capital" Dr. SO 900 600 On
without tax.
On the other hand, consider a corporation organized and u by men
in this state, the capital stock of which is $40 5000, but whose chief
capital is III energy and personal effort of OF a In 1917 the business
prospered and the profits were around ST., 900 90. This company maid
on III of its profits, above the deduction, a ar tax Of 60 per Gel
So does the law favor a big corporation, with great aggregatons Of
capital asagainst the small corporation whose principal asset is the energy
and industry Of its owners.
In thus voting against every amendment to adequately tax the var
profits Of big corporations, Senator Sterling did not represent the sentl-
ment of South Dakota
Pork Barrel Appropriations.
Many millions of dollars are regularly appropriated by Congress in
River and Harbor Bills" Some of it, of course, for worthy public pr-
lroses-but much, probably most of it, for unimpTtant creeks and socalhd
rivers. with no traffic, with little water. and which for purposes Of com
lmercial navigation could not be considered seriously.
Such waste of public money is reprehensible.
Senator Sterling never failed to vote for these pork barrel rns dunno
his term in the Senate.
Mr. Byrne made good as governor and a member oil the state legisla-
ture. Mr.. Ringsrud said: "He represented the people at all times and
stood firmly for their interests. favor his nomination and election as
United States senator because 1 feel that during the remainder oft h war
and during the readjustment period which will come after the var
tnt taxation questions will arise and big interests will attempt t. eyade
their own just burdens and shift them to the shoulders of the people.
Mr.. Byrne, rs senator would fight against such evasions. 1t is a cold. bust
ness proposition. The people of South Dakota need a man in the United
States Senate who will represent them rather than the individual and or
gained pronteers of the New England states"
ExGov. Byrne has always stood for the interest Of the people-hfs
record proves that. Hasn't he demonstrated that he is entitled t. your
vote at the Republican Primaries May 2Sth?
@r BYRNE FOR U. s.. SENATOR