The Ely miner. [volume] (Ely, Minn.) 1895-1986, 1922-10-13
AMENDMENTS.

In another place IN ChlS paper
will be found the text and explana-
ton of the Proposed Constitutional
Amendments to be voted on at the
election on Nov. 7th. No. 1, or
the Rural Credits Amendment to the
Constitution, if adopted will enable
the legislature to provide the mach
inery for a state rural credits
system. For years, the farmers of
the state of Minnesota have need
ed facilities that would provide
credit for capital investments at
low interest rates. Though, the de-
velopment, thus far, of the state as
an agricultural empire has been AN
achievement of which every citizen
is justly proud, progress would
have been more rapid if, better
long time loan machinery had been
in operation The states constitu-
ton, which specifically provides that
Minnesota credit shall not be "given
or lent to any individual, associa-
ton or corporation" has been an
insurmountable obstacle in The path
of a state rural credits system such
as economists and farm leaders
agree is needed for the proper de-
velopment of the states agricultural
resources. The demand has been
widespread for a Rural Credits sys-
tenn and the legislature CT 1921
needing the call, passed in both
houses what is known as the Chris
tianson act. This act must be rati-
fled by the voters by a majority of
those voting. That part of the law
which states the extent to which
restrictions on the use of Mime
sofas credit shall be lifted saws
For the purpose of developing the
agricultural resources of the State.
the state may establish and main
tain a system of rural credits and
thereby loan money and extend to
the people of the state upon real
estate security, in such a manner
and under terms and conditions as
may be prescribed by law, and to
issue and negotiate bonds to pro-
vide money to be so loaned" AS
an assistance to the development of
the state and to make this easier
of accomplishment, this amendment
should be voted, YES.
Amendment No. 2 is the PERM
cious tonnage tax measure which
the lower state members of the leg
islature have by "might-makes-right'
methods placed upon the law books
OF the. state. Not content with hav-
ing this bare-faced robbery a law
on the statute books, it is now sub
mitted to the people of Minnesota
as constitutional amendment and
NO vote should be marked by
every voter and every voters fam
lily entitled to the ballot. Should
TINS amendment be adopted by the
voters, this robbery in the shape of
additional taxation would forever
stand as a bar to the mining sec
tons of the state and would open
the way for continuous gouge on
this particular industry on the part
OF the legislature from the rural
end of the commonwealth. The
amendment is camouflaged with the
name Occupation Tax" but it will
be noticed that nothing but iron
ore or mining is mentioned therein.
Farming, printing, milling, merchan-
dIslng, quarrying, numbering, etc,
all distinct occupations, are not
mentioned but mining is singled out
as the one occupation with which
the south end legislator intends to
educate his children, improve his
property and eventually cut out his
tax payments. AS there is no min
ing except in the north end. the
rural lawmakers are for it. their
vision extending only to the con
fines OF the county, or even village.
IN which they reside and the pros,
perity of the state as a whole is
lost sight of in the scramble to get
something for nothing for their In
dlvidual section. Every fair-mind-
ed man and woman in the state
should vote NO on this amendment.