OCR Text |
Show TAXATION AMENDMENT. The statements pro and con on the , aiines taxation amendment have been j submitted to the voters a provided , . by law, and they are to jdgc r: the j value of the arguments put forth. There I are some thing in the statement filed 1 by the committee r:. recent ing tho af-j firmative that should not be Hli.Ti'd to; pa.-s unchallenged I The statement thai mint"- a re 1 d ! now at only to o1- jrr cent i ud . value is rm-reiy :i-M-r: 'n-n, not t'pable of j.roof. All mining men and ail eap.v ' ble persons who have .-t itKif-l tin" -:: i jf'-t recngniz-.e th.i! the "fjll valu?"', of a mine cannot, f-r jdiy-i. al n-.i-ons, ! ie dciiniitdy irtp.;ned until it5 11. in- j era I contents liave been ext ra 'd and1 sold. llinf of I'tah :irc s.-t'S-" J at j TC-ent as )dh,u: j 1. On tli-.-ir Mj;-j':i:-e grountl. A'-turd-l in? to the la-t p:iidi-i;i-d r- pr.rt t' tin1. ta r board of e-piali ; ion . u.i ni-i g 1 lain? in Ft.ih v t re ni -e--rd at ani a vera i;e of . 1 . U I per acre a 9 i n -1 ' 513.11 per aTi1 lor a 2 ' i''u !t r: I iirr';i.'. 1 2. On their ma hinery rind improve- n.catri at aciii.il value a- other pnpertv.'j 3. On their annual nt piuecd-i at full value. j 4. Three per cent of their net pro- j ceeds an an "occupation la.' The theory that niin-a shal he taxed on outpa i1? bribed on the rry fact that it is impo.-5ible to fl'-.'ertniu tlie vuluo ot a mine until it has been worked out. Th cundit j on h; a 1 v n y be( n n-ol;-ni Y.oi. The a--ertion thru the mult i pie or -..bmultipb- ol' 11. ! pr.M ..-.! provided '.'V the j.roj.o-.-d amendment to be ttsed in arriving at :h t a xablo vabi" ot mines is to be fixed by the I- . i -!a 1 ;ii'.: i- in direct cor.i'li't v.r.h th" la 11 ; of tin' jTnpi'S'-d a mend :nr 11 1 , n i .h -1 -e -d!i-a!lv in'o'.ide tl.af the stale board of fona I ; ; ;i 1 i.rii di ji 1 j and t ;i I 1 ' i ad property herein emirnei a t ed. " ' " 1 t t h -in f ;!.: alu.- ol' elainis, iii Ii it pioiti--i. shall bo a-1-1--.'.! ''as pro- j vide. bv th.-reby inaKinu' a ele;r di. 'iio'tiioi bet we. ;i the MjauinT in I v. h'odi t in- net j.ro i-.-d.s a nd t lo- sur- ground :-). 11 be n ah.ed f..r ta .a- lion. II is true thai t tie . gMati.r-e will rout nine to i'i lie t a i-ite. ! .u (lie propoM-d ameiotinert ial. 1 1,.' valuation ot' net proceed-- od ol' tin-isand tin-isand -t of he l- :: ;. :.' Ml ,,, v.- ,n it w the board ol eTa1i: aiion. The M : 1 ! i p i e 1 1 1 that ' ' t l:U .'.or I 1 1 i: ' una I di-.Th.-ina inn in fa v or of mine li'i I'O'ii ei v rifnij s.nre I '.i 1 :,, ' a-"in a-"in thj;t -ar the h -g ! ! a ! ui e reduced all I :i !e ies r,.i .r c.-nt . ' ' ,-ali t f..r am.'bfic-.tio.i. 1 1, all th- year-i year-i : "in 1 a Jeho.i'l until nineteen .v ' i"-, I'M pr.perty m t he t ale u a-:- -ed a; i pom ::o ,, h ,,, ,. ,,i n1 ,,. '' V;iIi;"- ' : pi - -d- of mine , ' in- h -rr a . , :(( , t,o ;-H Mie.e V. :,!' The c,ail-(! in II,. manner of assessing property not made at the instance or request of tlic mining com j'-anie?. Tt was. however. I recommended by the late commision ; on re"enue and taxation, of which tin author of the argument in favor of the '.rcr-ent amendment was a member, the same body which favored centralizing the asessment of all property in a state heard wit h y ower to a ppoint and re-' re-' move local assessor. The present "discrimination"- is not the act of the min-I min-I ing companies, which had no part in I bringing about the condition, and j should . not, therefore. be penalized for it. The allusions to proposed constitutional constitu-tional amendments submitted previously should be accompanied by the statement that the people of the state voted them jdoun, thereby oxpre.-.-dng their emphatic em-phatic disapproval of attempts to take f mida-nciuM rights away from them. It should al-o be remembered that sections 2 ami 3. article 33, of the constitution, con-stitution, defining property and providing pro-viding for uniform and equal taxation, taxa-tion, both of which sections are cited in the present affirmative argument as protecting property against excessive or inequitable taxation, are. two of the sections which the author of the affirmative af-firmative argument sought- to have taken out of the constitution two years ago, although he seems to find them valuable this rear. I : |