Democratic Sentinel, Volume 15, Number 26, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 17 July 1891 — WHAT THE RECORDS SHOW. [ARTICLE]

WHAT THE RECORDS SHOW.

Indianapolis Sentinel: “The new tax law, which the rabid portion of the republican i ress is criticising reoeived almost the unanimous support of both houses of the legislature. The bill was reported on Feb. 21 and printed the next day. It did not become a law until Mareb 6. This gave the Journal, the Republican members and Gov. Hovey nearly two weeks in which to discover any unjust or oppressive features of the bill. Thepress, the senators and representatives and the executive were supplied with printed copies ten days before the bill was passed. The bill was not rushed through the house. It was considered in committee of the whole for two days, the bill being read section by section by the clerk while each member followed its reading with a copv in hand. During all this time the Journal did not oppose the bill. Not a republican member raised his voice against it. On the contrary, several leading republicans spoke in favor of the bill, as the legislative reports of the Journal will show. When the bill reached the governor it was promptly approved. On the same day that Governor Hovey approved the tax bill he vetoed two other measures.

In the heuse the tax bill passed by a vote of 68 to 7. The seven members voting against the bill were Messrs. Aikman, Brown of Steuben, Guthrie, Latta, Morris of Henry, Morris of Parke, and Oldham. There were 26 republican members in the last house. The seven republicans recorded in the negative did not explain their votes. There were in thejlasthouse 27 members of the F. M. B. A., ana they all recorded their votes for the bill.— When the bill reached the senate it was referred’to the committee! on finance and was |not reported back for three days. There was an opportunity then for the Journal to speak in the interest of the tax-payers if the bill was as dangerous to them as it now pretends to believe. But not a line appeared in its columns advising the senate to defeat the hon e tax bill. Perhaps this is the reason why the republican members of the finance committee did not submit a minority report, but joined the democratic members of. the committee in recommending its passage. The bill passed the senate by a vote of 36 to 9. The negative votes were cast by Senators Clemens, Gilman, Grose, Hanley, Harlan, Kennedy (dem.) Loveland, Mount and Shockney. • The general tax bill does not increase the rate of state levy, as the republican press would make thetax-p yers believe. It does not contain a single line about the rate of taxation. It simply provides for a better system of assessment, a system that maTkes it impossible for rich men and corpoiations to dodge the assessor to anything like the extent they have been doing. But it is the increase of state taxes that the republican organs are howling about. It is true that the last legislature passed a bill—a very short bill—which reads as follows: Be it enacted, etc., that there shall be assessed in the years 1891 and 1892 the sum of 6 cents upon each SIOO worth of property in the state, to be collected as other state taxes assessed at the time are oollected, which money, when collected and paid in the state treasury, shall be kept and known as the “benevolent institution fund” and the proceeds of the tax herein levied are hereby appropriated to the use of the benevolent and reformatory institutions of the state.

Upon a motion to suspend the rules to pass this bill in the house March 3 only one member—Mr. Patten, democrat—voted “no." The bill then-passed by a vote of 69 to 6. Every republican except two voted for the bill—Messrs. Bryant and Oldham. The other four votes in the negative were cast by Messrs. Patton, Trimble and Wright, democrats. On March 5 the bill passed the senate without a word in opposition, and Messrs. Boyd, Cniver, Caster, Clemens, Gilman, Grose, Hanley, Loveland and Shockney are the only senators recorded against the bill on roll-call. The governor promptly approved this benevolent institution tax. And why not? Governor Hovey, in his message, had reoommended an even

i greater increase of the tax levy. Everybody familiar with the faots had long conceded its necessity, and the Indianapolis Journal had urged it with especial vigor upon successive legislatures. These, are the faots, and they afford a striking commentary upon the present attitude of the republican organs upon this subjeot. The Souvenir Spoon Craze seems constantly to strengthen, and everybody should read an admirably illustrated article on souvenir and historical spoons in the August number of Peterson. The pader gives much valuab e information and there are photographs of spoons from Christendom to Turkey and Morocco, some of them dating back to bygone centuries. Another attractive article is that on “A Famous Japanese Painter and his Sohool," which contains a long series of quaint and most delightful Japanese drawings. There are other capital papers on miscellaneous subjects, among which “The Folk Lore of ColorB,” by Mrs. E. A. Matthews deserves special mention.The stories and poems are all excellent. So also is an article on “Summer Outing.” The fashion and domestic departments a e such as onl can be found in thiß admirably conducted magazine, and fully justify its claim to being the favorite periodical for ladies. Terms, $2,00 a year; $1 for six months. Address Peterson’s Magazine, 306 Chestnut street, Philadelphia. American agents from our “tin-plate" corporations are in Wales trying to sow s ee<ls of discontent among the workingmen there double the wages here. That is nice protection to American workingmen,"and besides is in violation of tie alien contract laws. It is in harmony, however, with the principles of 1 the “protection” lerds, “Cheap labor for production, but “protective” prices for the product. ”