Jasper County Democrat, Volume 21, Number 102, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 22 March 1919 — GOV. GOODRICH’S APOLOGIES [ARTICLE]

GOV. GOODRICH’S APOLOGIES

His Excuse for the Late Legislature Show Lack of His Old-Time Political Finesse. Political gossip in the last week at the state capital has centered on Governor Goodrich’s apologies for the awful legislature of 1919. Never before has he been known to give away completely the cause he defending as he does in hisj interview on the new tax law, in the Star of March 12, in these words: “If this plan does not succeed, as I believe it will not, in greatly j increasing the amount of intangible ‘wealth upon the duplicate, then those who have opposed the classification idea will, in my judgment, be ready when the constitution is amended, in 1922, to accept a classification law under which I have no doubt that many hundreds of millions of dollars of intangible wealth can be brought upon the duplicate and contribute its fair share of the burdens of taxation in Indiana.” While the state tax board, and the Republican press are assuring the public that the taxes on tangible property will be largely reduced, on account of the intangibles that will be put on the tax duplicate, he frankly admits that he does not believe in their propaganda, and expresses his conviction that the effect of the tax law will be to make the taxpayers so sick of the effort to make intangibles pay their fair share of taxes, that they will be glad to let them off with nominal taxation. It is true that he assures < wners of real estate, in the same interview, “that the taxes paid by them will not be greater ift proportion than the amount for which they are assessed at this time, (but that will not fool anyone because it is a simple proposition of arithmetic that with tangible property assessed at true value, it .will require at least >7OO,-

000,000 of Intangibles to be added to the duplicate to keep real estate's share of the taxes where it is now; and nobody really looks for any such disgorging by the taxdodgers. Taxation is purely a matter of mathematics after the duplicate is made up. It is generally conceded that the combined effects of such an accident as the governor suffered last fall and the strain of the last session of the legislature are enough to upset the workings of any thinktank; and it is only on this basis that anybody can explain his state•nt as to the legislative record of 1919: “It is a record which for constructive character of its work has not been equaled by any general assembly in this state in the last half century.’’ The mention of this legislature in the same breath with the Democratic legislatures of 1888 and 1891, or even fthe Republican legislatures of 1905 and 1907, merits only the comment: “It is to laugh.” A microscopical examination of the laws adopted in 1919 fails to show' anything “constructive” about them except the governor’s effort to construct a political machine. His first specification is the highI way commission bill, which, as "constructed” and introduced, would I have enabled Mr. L. iH. Wright to I control the entire road-biulding machinery of the state for (political purposes, but which, by the aid of more than 5o amendments that were secured to the bill by the Democratic minority, was quite Tully “reconstructed” before it w r as . passed.

His" second specification of “constructive legislation” is the repeal of the Republican law of 1867 requiring the teaching of German In the public schools, and the provision that only English shall be used in the grade schools. Everyone who reads the newspapers knows that this was forced on the legislature by an expression of public opinion that it dared not disregard, and only after the most desperate efforts had been made to prevent it. Even then the legislature did not have the courage to say “German,” and hid its head in the sand by excluding all foreign languages. “Republican construction” is entitled to the credit for that subway to get by the pro-German vote, with as little disturbance as (possible.

His third “constructive” specimen is the tax law, which embodies nothing but the recommendations of the Democratic, majority of Governor Ralston’s tax commission 1916, but carefully omits their recommendations for bringing intangibles to light. He says this law will “make possible the assessment of all property upon a uniform basis,” but as noted above, gives his opinion that it will not secure the taxation of intangibles, and will drive the state to taxing them on a basis that is not “uniform,” after his proposed amendment of the constitution makes that possible. The remainder of the governor’s specifications are chiefly his own schemes, which he could hardly refuse to Indorse. It would be interesting, however, for him to ex-

plain why, if It la -beneficial to take the supervision of banking and invurance business away from the auditor, who might be supposed to know something about them, if is also beneficial to lump the geologist, forester, fish and game commissioner and entomologist under a "conservation commission” with “one responsible head,’’ mostly Richard Lieber. Possibly it la because Mr. Lieber frankly acknowledges that he knows nothing of any of the sciences of these departments, and therefore will not be troubled by them. In fact it has been suggested that the name of this commission is twisted, and that it should be called the “conversation commission,” it being noted also that the law does not prevent the conversation being carried on In the German language. Perhaps his most Important specification Is the “blue sky law," which is a very good measure, except that it failed to pass. Possibly the governor means that it would have been “constructive legislation” if it had passed. But then he is not altogether to blame for not being aware that It did not get through, as there is -probably nobody who does know just what did get through this most remarkable legislature, unless, perhaps, it is the lobby, and they are not saying anything. It ©ay even be that he intended to include himself when he said: “The record of this general assembly is one that I believe will meet with the approval of the people of this state In increasing degree as the results accomplished are carefully studied.’’ At least there is room for much improvement in the governor’s case by careful study of the blue sky might-have-been law. Another of the governor’s mental eccentricities that is attracting notice is his stated reason for vetoing the fire marshal bill. This bill increased the duties of the office, and increased the marshal’s sa’ary SIJSOO. In an interview in the Star of March 13, the governor said he “was not opposed* to most of the provisions of the bill, but he could not approve it because it provided for increasing the salary of H. H. Friedley, state fire marshal, from $4,000 a year to $5,500.” Friends of the bill called his attention to the fact that the expenses of the office were not paid by the state, but by the insurance companies, but he answered that this “does not justify excessive salaries.” Of course not, if the insurance companies thought it excessive, but if they had objected to this the bill would never have passed. The companies have been urging for several years that the average fire loss in the state is $6,000,000, and that 60 per cent of it is preventable, and insisting on greater efforts for prevention. In insurance circles, $5,500 a very moderate salary for a man competent for the management of such work; and, if insurance men

can be believed, the extra >1,500 was a mere bagatelle compared with the loss of their bill, which was really a bit of “constructive legislation.” If they are right, the state will now proceed with its custom of needlessly burning up >4,000,000' worth of property, and the insurance companies that pay for it will save the >1,500 through the cautious thrift of the governor. One can easily imagine the mental agony the proposed increase caused him, after getting through his >IOO,OOO oil inspection scheme, and approving the salary increases appurtenant to his various machine bills. It is on a par with the economy of statesman Buller, from Grant county, who, as a member of the conference committee, succeeded in defeating the customary 1 small appropriations to the state academy of science and the Indiana Historical a society, on the giround that he “didn’t see no sense in historical and scientific societies.” Which shows that a Republican statesman can be both

constructive and constrictive, and one little head can contain it all. It may be added shat the governor did not (mention the most original and constructive piece of legislation accomplished. It was slipped into the general appropriation bill by the conference committee at the last moment, and went through during the final carnival without attracting attention. It is in these words: “Wherever a general appropriation is made for the payment of all salaries and other expenses of any office, board or commission, the salaries of employes paid out of such appropriation, unless otherwise fixed by law, shall be subject to the approval of the governor.” As the only salaries fixed by law are those of the heads of such boards and commissions, the .effectiveness of the club over all state officials thus placed in the governor's hands is evident. Why, then, is the governor so silent aljout this constructive Rephb-

lican achievement? — Indianapolis i (Correspondence to The Democrat. I