OCR Text |
Show KILL THE MINING AMENDMENT. i . ! IN a recent issue of the Deseret News we find the following : "In accordance with the decision of a joint committee, represent- j ing the school superintendents of the state and the Utah Educational association, mimeographed copies are being sent to the various district dis-trict school superintendents, giving the argument of Jesse Knight, of t ' Provo, against the constitutional amendment proposing new methods of taxing mines, and a number of arguments for the proposed amend- ment. These include the argument of the committee of school su- j perintendents, a letter from Harden Bennion, secretary of state, and a sheet which gives four questions propounded to the attorney general gen-eral of the state by Francis W. Kirkham, of the superintendent's ! committee, and the answer of Dan B. Shields, the attorney general." Were it not so serious 'a matter the amusing features in the above to those who can readily read between the lines would be ludicrous. A joint committee representing the school superintendents of . the state and the Utah Education association i.ved at a decision to distribute the argument of Jesse Knight aga.nst the constitutional i amendment, together with a number of arguments for the amend- ment, including that of the school superintendents, a letter from Harden Bennion and a sheet which gives four questions propounded to the attorney general of the state by Francis W. Kirkham, and the answer of Dan B. Shields, the attorney general. In other words, the poor deluded school superintendents and the members of the Utah Educational association and Harden Bennion J and Dan B. Shields, all necessary parts of the well-oiled Democratic n machine, surprisingly are in perfect accord. They put their heads j together to say everything they can in favor of the amendment, in j accordance with their instructions including the opinion of Dan B. Shields on the subject, and send the whole mess together with the argument of Jesse Knight to the various district school superintendents. superintend-ents. There has never been in this state a more palpable plot to drar an organization which should have nothing whatever to do with pof itics into the meshes of a political machine, but we wonder, even if Simon I, a rotten state organization and the leaders of several state educational institutions, are banded to put over the propaganda, if j the people won't stop to think and weigh the wofds of a man like J Jesse Knight against those of Harden Bennion, Francis W. Kirkham I and Dan B. Shields and the educational sycophants. Mr. Kirkham is known for what he is. Mr. Bennion has about as much influence as( secretary of state as he would have if he did not hold office, and tire weighty decisions of Mr. Shields on important subjects constitute the best criterion to go by when he is answering questions regarding the effect of the amendment in a way that will Hoest serve the interests of the Democratic machine. Elected by accident ac-cident with the rest of them his decisions since taking office have been mainly joy producers to relieve the daily monotony. We believe that if the people of Utah will as carefully consider . what the effects would be if this mining amendment is passed, as they do the personnel of the tickets in voting as. well as many questions ques-tions which are not of half so much importance as this mining amendment, amend-ment, that the proposal to pass this blackmailing measure would be buried so deep that no one would ever dare to spring anything so in- . famous again. Jesse Knight's reply to Brother Bennion's diatribe has not been jeen by a large number of voters, and in order that we may assist in giving it wide publicity, we reproduce it. It reads as follows : I would like the privilege of discussing briefly the article in The News of October 4 by Secretary of State Harden Bennion j - in defense of the proposed constitutional amendment on mine taxation. Mr. Bennion omits from his statement some facts with which he, as a public officeholder for many years and a former member of the state board of equalization, must be entirely familiar. fa-miliar. He suggests that the mines pay only a tax on their profits. Mr. Bennion knows, and ought to have mentioned, that the mines are taxed on the acreage of their claims at values considerably Higher than the average for agricultural acreage and also on all their improvements, the total of these items ' amounting to something like $15,000,000 in addition to their net proceeds. He also knows that the net proceeds tax is not a tax on profits, as the law and practices of the state board of equalization equali-zation do not permit such deductions as would make this a tax " -" on profits ; it is, in fact, about fifty per cent more than the actual profits. " Mr. Bennion says mines are not taxed on their actual value. What is the measure of a mine's value if its output, on which it is now taxed, is not? Its value consists entirely of its mineral contents and they yield nothing until they are taken out and the state taxes them as they come out. In other words, the mine owner is taxed on every part of his property whose use he enjoys en-joys by the present method of taxation. In this respect, a mine is unlike most other classes of property, such as land or factories, fac-tories, whose owners enjoy every year the use of the entire property. To tax the unrealized, and unKiiown values in a mine , is to tax a man on property which is not in his possession and which, in fact, may not exist. Even supposing it were possible ! to ascertain how much ore is located in a given mine, who can tell what it will be worth when it is taken out? In other words, what is the value today of a pound of lead or a ton of coal p which will be mined twenty years from now? Lead is worth J today twice what it was three or four years ago. This is on account of the war. Will it be worth as much in twenty years . as it is now? Will there be another war twenty years from now ? The answers to both questions will be equally valueless. j Of course, nobody knows the answer to either and that is just I why .this talk of "full value" of a mine is merely talk. Mining engineers have dropped it from consideration entirely and base their valuation of a mine on the character of the ore, on geo-i geo-i logical inferences as to its continuity and on assumption as to Iwhat it will cost to take the ore out and what it will be worth i when taken out. The valuation is speculative, and they frankly v say as much. This is one of the inherent risks of mining. The state, however, is not confined to inference or assumption. It gets an exact statement of the product as mined and taxes.it j every year. The mine owner takes the chance. There are J , mines in this state that have levied assessmente one year to pay the net proceeds tax, of the pre, ions year and meet other operating expenses. BlBKMMMBPWWBMMMHMB8IMBlBMMBMMjeBap8WMWgWMl'MI'lliilflii iilwiwinnii " c,maMMaMMMMg I do not agree with Mr. Bennion's statement that the op- 9 eration of the proposed amendment would require legislative 9 action and be subject to legislative control. That is not what 'I it says. I would attach more weight to his contention that the 9 welfare of the mines would be safe in the hands of the board of 9 equalization if I knew who is to appoint all the future boards 9 and whom he would appoint. I would also attach more weight 9 to this if I had not had occasion to note some of Mr. Bennion's 9 taxation ideas. He is on record officially as advocating that 9 revenue and taxation should be wholly eliminated from the con- 9 stitution, also that county assessors should be appointed and 9 removed by the state board of equalization, instead of being 9 ' elected by the people, and several other general character, I which makes it easy to understand why he would favor the I present amendment or any other scheme to center wide powers 9 in appointed officers. I think men who hold public offices for a long period of I years get in a frame of mind, even with the best intentions, I which makes it difficult for them to get the point of -view of I the average citizen's interest. They unconsciously get to thinking along lines that would simplify their own work with- I out weighing fully the effects on the public. For instance, in I this tax matter, if the public officials had the power to take all I revenue they needed from one or a few industries, they would I not have to bother about seeing that all classes of property I paid their proper share and could keep themselves popular with certain elements of the public at the expense of others. I The effect of this, of course, would be ultimately to ruin those I industries which were being bled ; and it was, perhaps, with this I idea in mind that the constitutional convention adopted the I present provisions of the constitution so that no particular I class of property could be taxed out of existence. |