Newspaper Page Text
_ N ' - ‘ ' MjS _______ ' * = T ** lS mi ■■ r . This Republic was KW** ==~~ | v 7 "1 t±~ -:■ [I ] i I 11/ A upon principles which involved ■ * I IIP l-rPPfIT WPQT sSWial ltu£°£Z dress slip will tell at what ■III/ 111 I if 1 1 I ) f V I 11 II- construct Caste. A Caste cannoi ber your subscription expires. p~5 «i*t<meai ■* ■V/ V/l JL V/vli 1/ ¥ ¥ V/k/ vl co-exist with a Republic. ; I',' . *I.OO A YEAR IN ADVANCE. The article given below is the text of a paper read by A. Y. Merrill of Minneapolis, before the alliance state convention which convened in that city in the early part of the present month. It is well worth the attention of every farmer in this state. The subject of taxation of railroad lands is treated in a lucid, strong and intelligent manner. Section 1 article 9 of the constitution of the state of Minnesota pro vides that all taxes to be raised in this state shall be as nearly equal as may be. Section .3 of the same article provides that public burying grounds, public school houses, hospitals, academies, colleges, universities and all seminaries of learning, all churches, church property used for re ligious purposes and houses of public worship, institutions of purely pub lic charity, public property used exclusively for any public purpose and personal property to an amount not exceeding in value S2OO for each in dividual, shall be by general laws exempt from taxation. Ail other prop erty shall be taxed and as provided in Section 1. The taxes shall be equal. In face of these two provisions of the constitution of the state t)f Minne sota, there are today within the limits of the state not less than 5,000,000 acres of land, exceeding $25,000,000 in value, upon which not one dollar of tax is collected in any form or for any purpose. They are held abso lutely exempt from all taxation whatever. If this be true, it is undoubtedly a question of great importance to this state and its taxpayers that these lands should be taxed. The lands above referred to consist in most part of wild and uncultivated land held by various railroad companies. While it is true that they haye disposed of enormous areas of this land, they now hold more than 5,000,000 acres, almost as much as the entire cultivated area of this state, notwithstanding the fact that in most cases the roads have been constructed and in operation for more than 20 years. These lands being by the present laws absolutely exempt from tax ation, and contributing nothing to the burden of maintaining the common schools and other local institutions, are a great incubus upon the north ern part of the state and they are today, doing more to retard its devel opment than any one thing. 1% Take for instance the county of Aitkin. In round numbers it has an area of 1,400,000 acres. There are on the tax list 200,000 acres. The railroads hold exempt from taxation 700,000 acres. Imagine the condi tion of the farmer in Aitkin county, which is composed largely of timber lands, who has taken up a quarter section of land and starts in to make a farm. He is compelled to build a road across the intervening railroad section entirely at his own expense. He thereby improved the railroad land and makes it of more value and the railroad companies promptly advance the price of the land.* In this way settlers are prevented from coming in and improving the property and the small portion of the coun try that is improved has to bear the enormous burden of the entire coun ty, state and municipal taxation without any contribution whatever from more than one-half of the entire county. Polk county has more than 200,000 acres, Crow Wing more than 150,000; Cass, Carleton, Clay, Mille lacs, Todd, Wadena, Hubbard, Otter Tail, Norman, Marshall, Kittson, St. Louis, Lake, Cook, Kanabe;, Becker, Beltrami, Itasca and many other counties are in the same condition, varying only as to the amount of land located in these various counties. If these facts are true, the question presents itself, why are not these lands taxed as other property is taxed? Some of you will say that the railroads owning these lands pay 3 per cent upon their gross earnings, which is in lieu of all taxes, and for this reason the lands are taxed, and it is but an apparent exemption and not an actual exemption. Let us see if this is true. The supreme court of Minnesota in a number of cases have held that the tax upon the gross earnings of a railroad company is not an exemption of its property but a substitute mode of taxation (The County of Ramsey vs. the C. M. & St. P. R. R., 33d Minnesota, p. 537). It bases its decision upon the ground that it was the intention of the legislature when passing such laws, to include only such property as is used in or about operating, maintaining, or construction of road, the property used for corporation purposes, as I shall refer to it hereafter. Something which contributes to the sum of the gross earnings upon which the tax is levied. If the proceeds from the sale of the lands or the proceeds from the sale of the products of the lands are not included in the sum gross earnings, then it is plain that the lands pay no tax whatever and are therefore absolutely exempt, and this is the fact. They are not included in the sum gross earn iugs, they contribute in no way to said sum, and are not used for corpo ration purposes, but are simply held for speculation. In answer to the argument that the exemption laws in the interests of the roads are contracts, the United States supreme court is quoted: “ Nei ther the right of taxation or any other power of sovereignty in which the community ha 3 an interest in preserving undiminished will be held by the court to be surrendered, unless the intention to surrender is plainly man ifested in words too plain to be mistaken. Nor does this rule rest merely on the authority of adjudged cases; it is founded in principles of justice and necessary for the safety and well being of every state in the union.” Chief Justice Marshall, the ablest constitutional lawyer that this country has ever known, takes the same position. Justice Field and the chief jus tice in another case have said: “This power (meaning the tq.T power), which in all modern political societies is absolutely necessary to the contin ued existence of every such society, cannot be granted away by any one of the annual legislatures. No civilized government has ever existed that did not depend upon the taxing power in some form for its existence. To hold then that any one of the annual legislatures can by contract deprive the state forever of the power of taxation is to hold that it can destroy the goyernment which they were appointed to serve, and that their action in that regard will bestrictly lawful.” The supreme court hBB said that this is not an exemption, but a substi tuted mode of taxation, and it can be changed, the same as any other law providing for the taxation of property in this state. It is true that the laws were made optional with the railroads as to whether or not they would accept that mode of taxation, but this does not constitute a contract. Two modes of taxation existed. One was by direct assessment upon the property of the corporation, the same as other prop erty in the state is taxed; the other upon the gross earnings of the corpo ration, which should be in lieu of all of taxes upon its property. The rail roads were s’mply given the option as to whether they should pay taxes in the ordinary way of direct assessment or a tax upon its gross earnings in lieu of that. Nobody will contend that the law proyiding for the direct tax upon its property could not be changed at any time by the legislature. Why then cannot a law which provides for the taxation upon its gross earniDgs be changed at any time in the same manner, subject to the pro vision in the constitution to submit the same to the people for approval. The bill, which was introduced in the last session of the legislature two years ago and came within one vote of passing the senate, after having passed the house, simply provided for the taxation of the railroads in the same manner as they are now taxed, to-wit: Upon their gross earnings at the same rate that they are now taxed, with this exception, that any prop erty held by them and not used for corporation purposes, which does not contribute to the sum of gross earnings, should be taxed in addition there to in the same manner another property is taxed,and this is in accordance with the decision of the supreme court in the Thirty-third Minnesota, to which I have above referred, and many other cases decided by the courts. It is just to the land grant roads and does them no injury. A railroad in this state today, which has no land grant and earns, we will say, $1,000,- 000, pays the same tax and no less than a similar railroad which earns $1,000,000 and has a land grant worth $5 000.000. This is not equal taxation as between the railroads themselves. While it is true that the corporate property of one railroad earning $1,000,000 might not be the same cash value as the property of another railroad earning a like sum, and hence if taxed the same, might be said to be an unequal tax, is not a case parallel with the one cited for the reason that the value of railroad property used for corporation purposes lies chiefly in its earning power, and if the corporation owns a large amount of property, which is not used for corporation purposes, the situation is different and the courts have held that it should be taxed. Would the land tax affect the gross earnings tax law? In support of my statement that I do not believe that the railroads desire a repeal of the gross earnings law, I desire to call your attention to this fact, that prior to 1887, the laws, general and special, providing for the taxation of railroads in this state upon their gross earnings, were all made optional with the railroad companies, as to whether they should ac cept them or not, that is, it was left to their choice whether they should be taxed bv a direct tax upon their property, or whether they should pay a ( i. if * ’ \v% Railroad Land Tax. A NATIONAL EXPONENT OF THE PEOPLES PARTY PLATFORM. ST. PAUL, MINN., FRIDAY, JAN. 20, 1893. certain per cent upon the gross earnings, and this applied to all railroads whether they owned any land grants or not. Now if the contention of a good many of those people who are advancing the idea that the railroads, having sold the lands are now desirous of get ting rid of the 3 per cent tax is true, then it Is reasonable to suppose that if railroads having no land grant had the privilege of taking the dircet tax or paying upon their gross earnings, that those having no land grants would of course pay by tne means of a direct tax, for that is what they contend—that the railroads having sold their lands, now desire to be rid of the three per cent gross earnings tax. Let us see what the railroads in this state which had no land grants have done. From an examination of the records in St. Paul I find that, among others, the following railroads, which have no land grants and nev er had any, yoluntarily accepted the 3 per cent gross earnings tax: Minne apolis & St. Louis, tne Albert Lea Route, the Chicago, Milwaukee A St. Paul, the Little Falls & Dakota (this railroad had a land grant, but is compelled to pay taxes upon it in addition to its other tax), the Minneso ta Northwestern railway, the Wisconsin Central, the Northern Pacific, Fer gus Falls & Black Hills, St. Paul & Northern Pacific, the Fargo Southern, Chicago, Burlington & Northern, the Minneapolis & Pacific. These rail roads had no land grant* yet they voluntarily paid 3 per cent upon their gross earnings. Does this tend to show that the railroads prefer to pay a direct tax upon their property, rather than to be taxed upon their gross earnings? I think not. If the laws prior to 1887 providing for the taxation of railroads upon their gross earnings are not contracts, and there isn’t any manner of doubt but they are not, then it follows that the legislature of the state may in a proper manner amend those laws by increasing or decreasing the rates of tax so as to make it equal with other property in the state, or they may, as we contend, make any changes as to what property shall or shall not be included in the 3 per cent or such other rate as may be prdvided for by the legislature. Third. The land, including all the natural resources of wealth, is the heritage of all the people, and should not be monopolized for speculative purposes, and alien ownership of land should be pro hibited. All land now held by railroads and other corporations in excess of their actual needs, and all lands now owned by aliens, should be r.claimed by the government and held for actual settlers only.—Omaha Platform. No issue that is likely to come before the legislature this winter will equal in interest and importance the question of railroad land taxation, discussed in the very able paper by Mr. A. Y. Merrill, which we herewith pre sent. Mr. Merrill’s paper leaves little to be said, and is pervaded by an ad mirable spirit of candor. The intention of the government in making these grants was to pro mote the development of the country. The grants were criminally exces sive in amount—so much so that when the roads have now become so prof itable that they return annually increasing dividends on aqueous stock the companies yet have left out of their grants more than 5,000,000 of the people’s lands which they hold unused and untaxed. They have had ample time to dispose of the lands at fair prices, but *they hold them for the ex cessive speculative rise in value which they are sure ultimately to realize from the settlement and improvement of adjacent sections. They can af ford so to wait—first, because they have no capital invested in the lands; second, because the lands are exempted from taxation while other specu lators must pay tax on their holdings, and because they have received a great revenue from the sale of timber. The adjacent lands, held by settlers must bear all the burden of local and state taxation. Place these lands on the tax roll and make them contribute their just portion of the expense of government and they will speedily be unloaded. Then will follow settle ment and cultivation. They, would become pifoductive and a new impulse be gived to agricultural and commercial interests. It needs no argument to show that the policy of the companies retards the development of the state and tiefeats the specific object sought by the government in making the grants. If these lands were placed on the tax roll and the railroads were there by forced to unload them, that fact could work no injustice to the compan ies, for they would be forced to contribute only their just share toward paying the lunning expenses of a government in the benefits of which they are in many other ways especially favored, and they have now had the benefit of 20 years’ exemption. Bitter complaints have come from the northern counties, where the bulk of this mass of untaxed property lies. In nineteen counties there are 1,701,953 acres of railroad grant lands exempt from taxation and held for speculation. Could anything be more grossly unjust? Upon an assessment of $2 50 per acre it is estimated that the railroad lands of Minnesota would contribute in local and slate tax $325,000 an nually to the state. The peoples party men in the legislature may be relied upon to stand in solid phalanx and fight for the people upon this issue. All know the tremendous pressure of corrupt influence that will be brought to bear up on each member to defeat this measure of justice to the people; but each member will also know that a jealous constituency and a watchful press will scan his action. An Independent Press Association. The populist and independent press of the country evidently appreciate the opportunity which the establishment at Washington, D. C.,of an inde pendent news association —based on loyalty to the people and unwavering in its allegiance to the platform of the peoples party—affords them to es cape from dependence upon a news service long notorious for its abject ser vility to plutocratic interests. The work of the new association is only just begun, yet already it has received generous recognition and cordial welcome from the independent press. “The Union,” of Brookfield, Mo.,refers to the association as follows: “bureau of information. “Dr. Fish, of the Great West, has established a bureau of informa tion at Washington, D. C., of which The Union is a member, which will en able us to give our readers a view of the interior work at the capital and reports of events of national importance, as seen by an expert writer and friend of the people. His letters will not be shaded by policy, but will present the facts as seen. Heretofore we have been compelled to take what the associated press saw fit to give, wh ch means that the agents of mo nopoly first select that which you are permitted to read. Co-operation will relieve us of this enforced censorship, and The Union hopes that every re form paper will become a member of the Association. For particulars ad dress Everett W. Fish, 450 Pennsylvania ave., Washington, D. C.” Descanting upon the subject of “Modern ‘News ’ and its Triumphs,” the January number of the Review of Reviews very happily says: “ The crowning triumph of our day is, simply, the day’s news.' “News,” is not merely the passive and inactive reflection of the world’s doings, but is in itself the most powerful creative agency the world has ever seen. News begets a myriad of activities. Of all the kinds of magic that the tellers of fairy tales ever invented, none was naif so wonderful or potent as this modern magic that we term ‘news.’ It is federating the world; it is annihilating the false in religion and science, as well as in government and law.” It is true that news is a “most powerful creative agency” which “be gets a myriad of activities.” And it is equally true that the use of this greatest engiue of modern civilization by the unbridled power of plutocracy throttles a myriad of activities that would redound to the interests of the people. Not only do monopolistic interests dominate all the gigantic news systems of the republic, and through them corrupt the fountain-head of news, but they absolutely dictate and control the edi torial policy of the daily press which they serve (?). To illustrate: The western branch of the assotiated press has just entered into a contract with the 'Western Union telegraph company by the conditions of which daily papers which receive the dispatches must discourage the national postal telegraph system* Is not the necessity obvious of concerted action on the part of the in dependent press to free themselves of the incubus with which dependence upon the old news systems hampers their labors? A Burning Question. Campaign Finances. Through the press and by correspondence we understand that Mr. Donnelly, at the late State Meeting of the Alliance, made remarks highly derogatory of r the work of the Great West during the campaign—that we published that the peoples party, or the committee, was corrupt, or favored fusion, etc. Not having the precise remarks at hand it will be im possible to reply in detail. But we can make the following statement: Any person who says the Great West charged fraud or fusion upon thejQarty_orJ|fae_committee 2 _or_Mr : _J&onneljy L or by slightest word criti cised the nartv, the committee, or Air. Donnelly, at any time previous to the election—is a falsifier, be that man, Mr. Donnelly or any other grateful politician. Not one word can be lound to that effect—nor a word uttered by us. On the other hand the Great West strenuously defended the party and the committee from such charges, ahd we laid the whole fatal affair to Louis Hanson personally, declaring the party free from the stain—just as did the chairman, T. J. Meighan. Every Vord uttered in the G. W. was in defense of the committee from the charges scattered broadcast throughout the nath m—the same as afterwards endorsed by Mr. Donnelly. Our defense of the committee may have been true. But so far as Mr. Donnelly was concerned it would not have been true. For Mr. Donnelly not only was mixed up in that deal, and knew of it, but long before that he had urged Dr. Fish to go to Baker, of the Globe, afterward chairman Dem. Com., and tQ J. W. Castle, congressman, and fix up a basis of combi nation! And after the election he published, as thd chief satrap of a rump committee, from the Merchants Hotel, a complete endorsement of the crime. that fusion business we were set as a flint, and at that hour when he urged fusion to us, we began to doubt—not Mr. Donnelly’s sincer ity in anti-mpnopoly hostility—but in the honesty of his methods. And while we worked early and late to carry that ticket, throwing almost life itself into the fight, we utterly avoided any references to men, friend or foe. Mr. Donnelly’s efforts to make it out that we assaulted the party are shameful—we defended , and laid the sole blame upon Louis Hansorf. We also understand that a committee examined the finances of our work, and found an account at Bird Island and at Faribault missing. We never kept the financial reckoning ourselves, of the Institute work, until June Ist., but Mr. C. H. Johnson did, and both kept track of how that count stood every day—and that account can be sworn to by both of We have not seen it since the July convention. The money sent to the Great West office, on the $2,000 Lecture Fund, was all published, with the expenses. It left the fund in our debt $132. ‘ The Institute receipts werq not embraced in the $2,000 fund at any time intentioually. But as a question has been raised in regard to it, we will publish all of it, from the start, on April 18th, 1892, to the close at La Cresent. (The two meetings last week before election, on return from Dakota, did not pay expenses, on account of distance travelled from Da kota, and back again.) Mr. Johnson will send on his book to Dr. Fish, at Washington, D. C., for copying, and we will now take it from June Ist. (when both kept daily balances) and publish every cent received or expended—following with Mr. Johnson’s book, Apr. 18 to June Ist. On the start, Dr. Fish drew S2OO from the bank, and put in a special pocket, and never drew it forth without smiles and comments on the part of all three or four of the party, over the necessity of falling back on the “reserve.” That S2OO disappeared. On that 18th day of April our bank account will show a deposit of SB3O (The G. W. had a bank account for current business and a Safety Vault Box for heavier balances.) By July 12th that bank account of SB3O had dropped to $l3O. That is the cur rent history of our finances carrying a quartette over the state. As to the truth of these statements we can bring the affidavits of C. H. Johnson, as honest a man as ever trod the earth, and of Mrs.E. W. Fish. Mr. John son will make oath to more than that—that we spent money for the work continually which was not reported and put down. And during the early part of that campaigning we paid Mr. Donnelly’s expenses out of our own pocket— and he was told by us that every dollar paid on his account came out of us I—And we paid nearly $l5O for Mr. Donnelly’s printing out of the fund, which has never been paid us by the committee or any one else! We also understand that Mr. Donnelly represents that he obtained some 3,000 campaign subscribers for the G. W. So he did. But is that supposed to be a kindness (or a benefit) TO US? Why, when we offered the paper at lc. per copy we supposed, of course, that it was a gift by us— to the committee or Mr. Donnelly. Where is the publisher who could put out such a journal at lc. per copy without loss? Show us the man! Why, we kept a book account of 7,000 such names—addressed the wrappers every week , furnished the papers which cost more than that, wrapped them in separate wrappers—and paid postage—on the entire 7,ooo—for from seven to ten weeks—and our manager continually told us how fearfully we were losing money every week on the gift, and wondered how we could stand it!! But we did—and then we discover that the several hundred dol lars (postage of S4B on one bill) given by us was a kindly gift “by Bro ther Donnelly” TO us! We will be unable to publish all the items of the Institute account in one week. “All the items” will never appear—and when not put down they were our loss. Receipts are always put down. They passed through two hands. So we will begin with the account of Dr. Fish beginning June Ist. 1892, because the account book is at hand, and by the time this is closed up'to Oct. 17th, we can get Mr. Johnson’s individual account from April 18th to June Ist., and have it ready. Dr. F. did not keep accounts until June Ist. We copy direct from'our book, our remarks to explain being put in brackets, [thus]. We copy even the form used in book: 1892—June Ist. Bal. with C. H. J. in the morning by receiving $7 from C. H. J. and get ting credit for $2 46. [That is C. H. J. had $7 for ns by preyions collec tions, which his book will show, and we had spent $2.46.] EXPENSES. RECEIPTS. Balance, charged to E. W. F. at Hntehinson before collections there, [E was held to account for this sum by Mr. Johnson—or by a finance committee. $32 48 Hutchinson, Ist col ...$ 7 35 [Some one handed ns.] .. 25 John Schulz 5 00 Hutchinson, 2d col 3 70 “ 3d col„ 2147 37 71 $lO 00 Glasby [Lst Tenor, Salary] 100 Printing at Hutchinson. 75 Cartage. , 8 00 Hotel. 5 00 Al. D. Stewart. 561 Tickets [R. R ] 10 00 Johnson [Expenses on out-meetings, etc, some articles purchased.] 1 00 E. W. F. Carfare. 25......5t. cars and......[blurred —can*t read it.] 1 4161 - CMdMamDaa.B. $7025- VOL. IV. WHOLE NO. 171