Show taxation of mines mi 0 nes jesse knight of provo utah who stands high in mining circles in th the ewest wept and anbo ho was appointed to present an argument protesting against the adoption of the proposed amendment to the constitution of lae state of utah providing for the taxation of mines by a multiple or sub multiple of their net proceeds has filed his statement with the secretary of state in his argument mr air knight voices the opinion of practically every mining man in the state and there are thousands of others who will see the injustice as well as aa the danger in the adoption of the amendment mr air knights argument follows the method designed in the proposed amendment for taxing mines is wrong in principle contrary to the theory and spirit of our american government savors of and should be defeated by the voters of the state regardless of political af affiliation to delegate such powers to a board chosen by a partisan governor and responsible to him only would take away the pitr rights ats of the people be extremely dangerous and might result in confiscation of property the amendment places no limitation whatever on the board of equalization in assessing net eeds of metal mines to confor confer by the organic law of the state such unlimited power upon an appointed board would be infamous the proposed amend amendment was not in produced irod trod until the last day of vie legislative session indeed several lays days after the constitutional period had expired expire tl and wart passed without notice wit without holit hearing and without due clue consideration it must be remembered that our constitutional provisions on taxation were deliberation by a nonpartisan framed after mature constitutional con convention venton chosen by the people who for that specific duty adopted and ratified their work rork it should not be tinkered with nor amended without grave consideration and imperative necessity which does not exist amendment unnecessary mine ne owners and operators expect and of 0 all additional their proportion desire to pay revenue necessary to meet the re in general and the quire ments of the state schools in particular our federal go government vern has shown the most equitable method of taxation namely the income tax both for individuals and corporations our constitution ution already provides for an income tax consequently no amendment is necessary A state income tax will provide all the additional revenue necessary and place the burden equitably instead of leaving such distribution to the whims and prejudices of an appointive board already we are making our income returns in compliance with national law this method has met and will meet the national requirements and is worthy of adoption by the states retard development on the other hand the proposed amendment to the constitution it if adopted would retard our development and would be the beginning of class legislation in this state a thing most to be deplored and would not provide a just or final settlement of the tax problem reducing to plain language it means constantly increased powers to the boa board adof of equalization who thereby can favor their personal friends and penalize their political enemies it is taxation without representation in its worst form and therefore violates every fundamental american principle it opens an avenue for political corruption and invites graft and blackmail the principle of the national income tax appeals to the public sense of justice notwithstanding the heavy burdens it imposes our legislature without constitutional amendment has full power to enact such laws as are necessary to meet any revenue situation and this is as it should be thereby in the words of thomas jefferson preserving inviolate the fundamental principle that the people are not to be taxed but by representatives chosen immediately by themselves elves knight scores officeholders after filing his answer with the secre atry of state mr knight gave out the following interview to the press 1 I have declined to make public my argument against the adoption of the ment to the constitution or to engage in any public discussion of it until now as I 1 do not believe that documents intended to become official documents of the state should be made public before they are filed with the state the law provides the manner for presenting this argument to the people and I 1 believe in following the law 1 I am now and always have been opposed to attempts unfortunately becoming too common to evade amplify or distort laws from their clear language and purpose my argument has now been filed with the state as provided by law and further disposition of it is out of my hands it expresses my sincere convictions and I 1 hope the voters of the state will not be misled into voting anything into the state constitution so iniquitous as is the proposed amendment 1 I believe it is positively illegal for officers of the state who draw salaries paid by taxes collected from the people to go about the country stumping and advocating for or against measures that will come up before the people at an election we have men at the present time under the guise of other business going about from place to place advocating the adoption of the proposed amendment they are officeholders and are pledged under the law to give their services to state business and should not be permitted to use their time and the pd peoples oples money to further their selfish interests or advocate their pet measures |