The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1919-04-22
T0WNLEY CALLS
HIS OWN ORGAN
STATE TAX LIAR
Big Ross Hard to Please in Esti.
nation Of Commissioner
F. E. Packard
DRAWS DEADLY PARALLEL
Shows How Courier-News' Own
Figures and Statistics
Were Called False
DRAWS DEADLY PARALLEL

attempt to explain the leagues new
system OF taxation, Tax Commission
er F. e. Packard today dictated thu
following: ....1.m. 49,
The North Dakota Leader of las
week took violent exception to my in
terpretation in the speech at Fargo
of the tax and revenue laws passe(
by the Sixteenth legislative assembly
The editor Of the Leader, with his us
ual delicacy and logic assatls these
contentious by using the term 100
and liar" with great frequency AM
incidentally points out that~l wilfull!
included items In my totals which ex
list only In my imagination.
As q matter of fact, where it wa!
necessary to estimate amounts IN al
irving at my totals, accepted tn
figures of the North Dakota Leade
and the Fargo Courier News. Ol
March 29th the Leader published, il
reply to certain statements OF Stat
Auditor KositZky, general summar!
and defense of the levies and appro
priatiOns of the sixteenth Legislative
assembly. The same article in
somewhat different form was publish
ed the following day in the Courier
News. From these two 'inspired' al
ticles I took every estimate used il
my Fargo speech.
April 19, the. Leader said:
"His first mis-statement was to
figure in the total amount appro-
priated for the 19l9-20 biennium
the sum Of $2,054,00O as interest
,tn hnnAS'
This figure is grossly exaggerated.
The bonds require no sinking
fund for, twenty-five years tsome-
thing Mr.. Packard seems to have
@oyerlooked) and if six per cent
interest were paid on the entire
$7,OOO,OO0 issue Interest on the
entire, $1O,OO0,O0O real estate
bonds will !. be Z, provided. by the,
terms of their mortgage securt-
7 ties) starting the first Of May the
amount could not exceed $70O,OjO.
The eiuspired% article published o
March n 29th and seth in the leagh
papers under sTownleys direction
and in defense OF his levies and al
preparations. was as follows:
"Only $4,000, 900 bonds issued in
1919. The total amount OF bonds
authorized by the 1919 legislative
assembly was $17,0OO,00O. 1t is
. probable that the full amount
authorized by the legislature for
the state bank and flour mills and
elevators will be issued. 1t is
vastlyimprobable, however, that
the ten million dollar bond issue
authorized for the Home Builders
association will be issued in the
year 1919. 1t is estimated that
not more than two million dollars
worth Of these bonds which will
be issued during the coming year
and that the, total amount Of bonds
which will be issued will not be
in excess of nine million dollars
for the fiscal year 1919. Assum-
Ing that the bond issues will not
be in excess of nine million dol
lars we find that the necessary
sinking fund on a nine million dol.
lar bond issue will be $500, 900
and the interest fund would be
$4,000, or q total Of $S40,O00. A
seventeenth mill levy on the esti.
mated assessed valuation would
provide this amount. Interes. and
sinking funds for the new indus.
tries are loan by the state which
will be paid.
The state auditor states that
$4,000, principal, and $3S.VOO in
terest on old bond issues must
be provided for in this years levy.
A levy of twO-tenths of mill will
provide these amounts"
The above computation was for tt
year 1919, and as l was dealing wit
the biennial period, deducted $54,0t
fro mthe 1921 levy for the intere
and sinking fund to care for previo,
debt, and took $2,O54,0OO as the tot
for the biennial period gave t..
Sixteenth legislative assembly Il
benefit of the doubt in the sum Of S.
600.
Yet the North Dakota Leader brant
me as q crook and q liar, because
repeated on April Is what they pu
lished ON March 80. April 19 aga
the Leader says:J
why he figures $1,s0o,Oo0 the
amount which will be raised In
TWO YEARS by the three cent
an acre tax for hail insurance.
1T is grossly unfair to include
this tax for special purposes in
any comparative statement, and
such comparison becomes actual.
ly dishonest when it is consider
ed that Mr.. Packard neglects to
include hail insurance tax or
the biennfum Of 1918. Yet in
that period the farmers of this
state actually paid out more than
35,OOO,OOO as premiums on hail in
surance. II Mr.. Packard claims
that the hail insurance tax should
be part of the general levy, sure
" he should not object to includ-
Ing the &5,OO0,O00 paid out in
premiums In 1917-18 with his to-
tai state taxes for that period. .
On March . and 30 Mr.. Townl'
caused to be Published in defense
this levy, the following:
"The hail Insurance tax OF three
cents per acre on al tillable land
(Coatinnsa on Page Two.)