Jasper County Democrat, Volume 19, Number 63, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 4 November 1916 — GOODRICH WANTS LAWS HI HELP THE TAX DODGERS [ARTICLE]

GOODRICH WANTS LAWS HI HELP THE TAX DODGERS

Being An Adept at This Himself He May Have a Personal Motive. • WOULD SWAT THE FARMER • .«*' ■ Governor Samuel M. Ralston In a Speech Points Out That Goodrich Is Advocating the Cause of Holders of Stocks and Bonds.

Indianapolis, Oct. 26.—Governor Samuel M. Ralston spoke Wednesday night at Booneville, taking as his text the proposed constitutional . amendment which James P. Goodrich, candidate for governor on the Republican ticket is advocating. As has already been proven by the records Mr. Goodrich has made a specialty of dodging taxes on his personal account, even leaving off his list his automobiles on which he secures a license but does not pay taxes. He also returned but SB3O personal property, including cash, and immediately made affidavit that he paid $18,500 to secure the empty honor of a nomination for governor. Among other things Governor Ralston said in his speech: A few days ago a pamphlet came to my possession containing a speech delivered by my friend, Hon. James I*. Goodrich, candidate for Governor on the Republican ticket, on the subject of taxation. He calls attention to the vast increase in value of intagible property, stating that It exceeds iu value the value of real estate and other tangible property, and yet that It pays hut a vqyy insignificant part of the expenses of our state government as compared with what is paid by tangible property. In this statement he Is absolutely correct. When Intangible property is not given to the assessor, visible or tangible property must bear an unjust and heavier burden through an increase of taxes. Recognizing this fact, Mr. Goodrich proposes to remedy this evil by amending our constitution so that the Legislature may authorize a lower rate of taxation on the property of the tax dodger than It will impose on the property*»f the honest man whose farm? and livestock and tangible assets are given In for taxation. This will nA remedy the evil but It will serve as a sugar plum to -the wrongdoer. It is the first time, and I say it with all kindness, that any candidate for a high office In Indiana has taken the position that a law should be enacted—yes, even the constitution should be amended—ln the interest of the law violator. To support Ills position Mr. Goodrich quotes from a speech delivered by ex--I’resident Harrison on the “Obligations of Wealth.”

Mr. Goodrich has the right, of course, to fy.vor the wealthy class by declaring for a constitutional amendment to permit that' class to escape its share of taxation by being favored with a very low tax, rate—say one or one and a fourth per cent.—while tangible property pays the current high rate. If Mr. Goodrich had read all the ex-Pres-ident’s speech on the obligations of wealth, he doubtless would not have cited Harrison in support N os his position for the classification of property for the purposes of taxation. Mr. Harrison was not in favor of surrendering to the tax dodger, but he was of the opinion that a stronger and more determined stand should be taken by those who favor equality in government for the enforcement of our tax laws. The ex* President did not propose to surrender to the tax dodger, but he proposed to make a stronger appeal to the judgment and consciences of his countrymen. And I warn you, fellow-citizens, against taking a stand for tj»e classification of property for taxing purposes. When you amend your constitution so as to permit the Legislature to property at will for this purpose, you wiii find the special interests swarming about your state eapitol at every meeting of the state legislature. While the home owner and the farmer or the stock raiser are at home In the wintry days of January and February looking after home duties, the man who owns brewery stock, or railroad stock or bank stock or other intangible or Invisible assets, ylll be at Indianapolis arguing with our Legislature that equity and a good conscience require a lower rate of taxation on their assets than should be imposed upon, the home owner or the farmers’ lands and herds. But the advocate of classification maintains that if a scheme could be devised whereby all properly could be assessed it would at first raise too much money. The remedy against this is a very easy one. The total value of all property is known before the tax rates are fixed, except as to the state rate; and if all tangible and intangible property were listed for taxation at its true cash value the rate of taxation would be so low that no property 1 owner would have the hardihood to complain of his taxes. But another thought should not be overlooked. Before you can make intangible property bear its share of governmental burdens, even on the basis of classification, you will have to devise a scheme that will bring the intangible property to light and expose it to the observation of the assessor. Suppose Intangible property were assessed on the classification basis, at one cent on the $100; wbat assurance would you have that all the Intangible property would then be assessed for taxation? Many men who avoid taxation now on our present basis, the basis of uniformity and equality provided by our present constitution, will not hesitate to secrete their Intangible assets even though a classification basis la adopted; and I admonish you, my feliowcitizens, to stand by the constitutional prevision on this subject, as given you by the fathers of our state. In the degree you get away from it, you yourselves encompassed by danger and injustice.