The Pleasantville press., 1924-10-25
PEOPLE WOULD PAY
If RAILROADS WERE
GOVERNMENT OWNED
Third Party Plan Would
Take Revenue From
States Involved.

have to be paid by the people, accord
Ing to VIII r. Wood, member OF con-
gress from Indiana and chairman of
the Republican National Congression-
al committee. Mr.. Wood has made
careful analysis of the situation,
noting the tax payments by the rail-
roads to the several state governments
last year.
If the roads were owned by the
government they would be tax free
just as the post offices now are. The
states would still need the money,
just as they do now, and as result
additional taxes would have to be lev
led on the citizens
Mr.. Woods complete analysis fol-
lows:
Robert Nj. LaFollette, the Social
ist-third party candidate for Presi-
dent, is trying to convince 100000
farmers that the surest cure for their
Ills is to bring about government own
ership of all the railroads in the coun-
try; that, If this is done, transporta-
tiou rates Of all kinds would be i'm
medlateIy reduced.
'There are lot of things, however,
that would transpire II this scheme
were carried out. that Senator LaFol-
lette is woefully silent upon. He is
not telling the farmers that the gov
ernment pays no taxes on its proper
ties and that it would pay no taxes
on the railroads of the country if 1t
owned them. He is not telling them
that the railroads are paying into the
various county and state treasures of
the United States more than $500, 0,000,-
000 annually, which sum would have
to be paid, in large part, by the farm
ers, once the government began the
ownership of the railroads.
Take the state of Wisconsin for in
stance: Last year the railroads paid
the state of Wisconsin $7,321, ,976 in
taxes. In the state of Minnesota the
railroads paid, last year, a total tax
to the state of SS,425, ,9S2. In Iowa they
paid $6,849. .703; in Kansas. $6,739, ,346 |;
in Indiana, S13,094.627. In these five
states alone the railroads paid $42,-
431, ,634 of the public tax burden.
have taken the figures In the above
named states because they are large
ly agricultural and in the event that
the government became the owner Of
the railroads of the country the farm
ers of these states would have to bear
the greatest part of the burden in pay
ing these additional taxes.
I'm the state of Iowa If the LaFol-
lette scheme were carried out, 1t would
mean an increase of $50 in taxes an
nually levied against each farm In the
state or $3.50 for each man, woman
and child in the state. In Kansas the
burden would be $40 against each farm
or $500 for each resident of that state.
In Minnesota. where Mr.. LaFollette is
making a strong appeal for votes, he
would take away from the farmer,
under the government ownership plan,
a tax income now paid by the rail-
roads and place it as an additional as
sessment of SAT against each farm in
the state, or $3.50 against each person
residing In that commonwealth.
Il am told that, in one county in
Montana, the total tax paid by the rail-
roads amounts, to 1851 per cent of the
entire levy In midsummer of this
year there was S104. 102 Of the total
tax assessed in that county delinquent,
upon which a penalty had been laid.
This Is convincing evidence that this
county was already taxed much more
than it was able to pay. Yet Mr.. La
Toilette would take away 3812 per
cent of the tax revenue of this coun-
ty, now being paid by the railroads,
and place it as an additional burden
upon the individual taxpayer.
'1n my own state of Indiana, the
railroads pay s13.094,627 in taxes an
nually The total tax of the state Is
| $124, ,S66,790. The railroads share OF
this tax is over 10 per cent. If Mr.
LaFollette's scheme were put into ef-
feet, the individual taxpayer of Indi-
ana would have to pay this additional
sum CT $1,000. .627 each year. In Mari
on county the railroads pay annually
s715,3SS in taxes, very substantial
item in the total of the taxes paid In
that county.
"The figures that l have given, ap-
plicable to the five agricultural states
named, differ only in degree from those
that might be given for every other
state In the Union.
mot only would the farmers be bur-
dened by the payment of these ad
ditional taxes. should the government
become the owners of the railroads
but they would also have an additional
burden to bear, the size of which II
Is hard to ascertain, In the shape OF
deficits occurring In the operation OF
the railroads Of the country for main
tenance, extensions and upkeep.
Some idea of what this burden would
be, may be had. however, by recalling
the experience during the period
of government operation of the rail
roads under the management of vii.
liam G.. McAdoo, when the amount OF
the deficit over the earnings of those
railroads taken over by the govern
ment was more than a million dollars
day, exclusive of the payment OF
exorbi.an. salaries to an army of Off
GERS.
'srhe farmers of this country, before
they accept the panacea of government
ownership of railroads. which Is bnl
forerunner of the socialistic state
- well to Stop. Look and Listen