"He told me that they had slipped a few cartridges when at target practice and that before inspection, after the shooting, Reid gave him some cartridges to replace the ones he had used. He further said that they had all agreed before they went out that they would keep their mouths, and that he would have told them at the investigation at Washington all about the shooting, but that he was afraid. I had no further talk with Conyers, because I saw that I was being suspected by the negroes around Monroe, Ga.
"William(his x mark)Lawson."Witnesses:H.J. Browne.Geo. W. Madert.
District of Columbia,ss.:
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the District aforesaid, this 16th day of October,A.D.1908.
[SEAL]Geo. W. Madert,Notary Public.
This day personally appeared before me Herbert J. Browne, of Washington, D.C., who, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
"I was employed by the War Department in May, 1908, in company with Captain William G. Baldwin, of Roanoke, Va., chief of the Baldwin Detective Agency, to investigate the conduct of the battalion of the Twenty-fifth Infantry, stationed at Brownsville, Tex., which conduct resulted in the Brownsville raid, so called, on the night of August 13-14, 1906, wherein one Frank Natus was killed, Lieutenant of Police Dominguez badly wounded, and the houses of several citizens were shot into. Captain Baldwin has charge of the secret work for the Norfolk and Western Railway, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway, the Southern Railway, and the Atlantic Coast Line, and is one of the best known and most responsible detectives in the country.
"In conjunction with him I have been continuously employed upon this work since its inception in May.
"The facts set forth in my report addressed to General George B. Davis, Judge-Advocate-General, War Department, under date of December 5, 1908, are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
"In particular I visited Monroe, Ga., to corroborate the investigation at that point of William Lawson, a colored detective in the employ of Captain Baldwin, whose affidavit and reports are annexed to and made a part of my report of December 5, 1908, above referred to.
"I had several interviews at Monroe with Boyd Conyers, ex-private of Company B, Twenty-fifth Infantry, one of the guard on the night of the Brownsville raid, and found that William Lawson's statements regarding Conyers were substantially and essentially correct. I personally obtained from Conyers further information detailing how the cartridges used in the raid were surreptitiously and illegally obtained and distributed, how the principal raiders proceeded, when and by whom the gun racks in Company B were unlawfully and secretly opened for the purpose of the raid, how the raiders were protected during and subsequent to the raid and given opportunity to clean their guns, and,in particular, was furnished by Conyers with the names of eight participants in the raid other than the three named by him in his statements to William Lawson, a total of eleven, including himself, the said Conyers, all members of Company B, Twenty-fifth Infantry.
"The leaders of the raid, as named by Boyd Conyers, were John Holloman, John Brown, Carolina de Saussure, and himself. Following them were William Anderson, James Bailey, Charles E. Cooper, William Lemons, Henry Jimerson, James 'Rastus' Johnson, and Henry 'Sonny' Jones. Sergeant Reid, in charge of the guard, was accused by Conyers of knowledge before and after the raid. Sergeant George Jackson, in charge of the keys of the gun racks of Company B, was accused of opening the racks for the raiders, and of again opening them subsequent to the raid in order that the guns might be removed and cleaned.
"I found Boyd Conyers in a disturbed frame of mind. No claim is made that his original declarations to William Lawson were other than those of a criminal boasting to one of his own race of his crime and of his success in escaping discovery. His subsequent declarations to me were given partly during moments of contrition and in a desire to unload his conscience by a confession and partly as the result of careful and persistent questioning.
"I found the effect of the letter from Senator Foraker to Conyers extremely obstructive. He seemed to regard it as a mandate to adhere to the false story told by him before the Senate Committee on Military Affairs, and as absolving him from any and all obligations to aid in uncovering the truth. Similar influences were encountered at many points, adding largely to the difficulty of obtaining admissions of even the most obvious facts relative to the raid.
"Herbert J. Browne."
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9th day of December, 1908.
[SEAL.]J.B. Randolph,Notary Public.
APPENDIX E
REPORT OF T.B. SKIDMORE,
Presiding Judge of Election, Precinct No. 1, Rio Grande City, November, 1906
Rio Grande City, Texas, 11/12/06.Hon. Jno. R. Hulen, Adj.-Gen.,City.Sir:
As the presiding judge for this Precinct, No. (1) one of Starr County, Texas, at the late general election held in this city on the 6th day of November, 1906, in the upstairs room at the court-house, used by the district judge as the court-room, permit me to make the following report of the proceedings had that day:
Having had no call nor communication from the Republicans of this place for representation among the (4) four clerks of the election subject to appointment by the presiding officer, they had already been named, taking care that one man who had theretofore voted the Republican ticket was chosen and also one man whom I knew to favor Mr. Gregorio Duffy, the ruling spirit locally of the opposition to the Democrats.
Also, having heard ugly rumors of threats accredited to the Republicans, I had notified eighteen (18) law abiding citizens to be present at the polls as early as half-past sevenA.M.on the 6th of November, 1906, then and there to take the oath of office and act as the peace officers during the election. Of these only 12, I think, appeared and were sworn in.
As soon as the election judges assembled they and those of the peace officers present and the supervisors were sworn in.
At this point the presiding officer stepped to the front door and noting that a body of armed men on horseback and afoot had assembled on the outside at the 100-foot limit from the polling place, asked who had dared come to the polls thus armed and was told they were the Republican voters.
Immediately Mr. F.W. Seabury called me to the foot of the first flight of steps and introduced me to a Mr. Creager, who, after replying that the armed men outside were Jose Pina's peace officers, demanded representation among the clerks of election. I told him that all parties had representation, but when he insisted on some of the names he suggested, it being agreed to by the person, I put Domingo L. Garza in the place of the Duffy representative I had called to act as clerk.
From the names Mr. Creager suggested as inside officer, I also chose Mr. Jose Pina, believing that by having him under my direction, the agreement between Mr. Seabury and the presiding judge on the one hand and Mr. Creager on the other, that the voters should come up stairs in pairs—one Democrat and one Republican together—could best be maintained, for the reason that the said Jose Pina had been the agency who, through his magisterial capacity incident to him as county commissioner for this Precinct, had appointed the (40) forty peace officers that Mr. Creager said the Republicans had at hand to preserve the peace and insure a fair and quiet election.
Thereupon Mr. Garza and Mr. Pina and the balance of the peace officers called by the presiding judge were sworn in, and word reaching me that threats of breaking in the front door below were being made by the Republican crowd outside, the janitor was ordered to open it; the polls were declared open and the timepiece set at eight o'clockA.M.
During the course of the first half hour—possibly it was that long—the agreement of pairing the voters coming up to the vote was observed. Then, noting that for some minutes nearly all the voters had been Republicans, inside peace officer, Jose Pina, was directed to see why there were no Democrats coming in.
On his return he told me it would be all right and that there were no Democrats at the door just then, but another of my deputies from below in response to my call came up and told me the Republicans had taken possession of the staircase and lower door and would only let such Democrats in as forced their way by them at peril of their lives.
At the end of about (2) two hours the disorder became so great that repeated demand had to be made on Mr. Jose Pina and the other inside officers to regulate the people outside the rail. On seeing that even Mr. Pina could not control his Republican friends I had to threaten the crowd with closing the polls if they did not preserve order, and remain in line instead of filling thearea outside the railing to such an extent as to threaten to tear it loose from the floor.
Immediately after the fourth threat of this kind, I was informed and could see from the faces of the crowd that only trouble would ensue if I tried that method to handle them, so I let them have their own way and thereafter they did break the railing supports loose from the floor. Thereafter, I repeatedly called on Mr. Juan Hinajosa, the Republican challenger, to enforce order and refused to receive any more votes until his people should get into line.
On entering the polling place, my only object was to see that a fair election should take place, and I do not think that I neglected any precaution to have it so. I repeatedly sent word to my peace officers below, after about half-past ten A.M., to clear the stairs and lower corridor of all who had already voted, but none of them could be found generally, and when one was found he would send back word that he could do nothing with the crowd and that Democratic voters were being turned away from the lower door and only Republican voters were being allowed to enter.
I have since been told by the peace officers of the election, that fear for their lives led them to desist from trying to enforce the entry of Democrats into the line going to the polls.
I have also since learned that Democratic voters who were business men of the town, left their places of business as many as three and four times and went to the polls to vote, but were denied entrance by Mr. Pina's armed deputies and other Republicans and their sympathizers. And also that four desperate characters with Winchesters in their hands were picketed in front of the lower entrance to the court-house, and that when asked if they were voters Mr. Gregorio Duffy replied, "No, they are only some posts driven in the ground there for a rear-guard to keep out the Democrats."
Also on examination of the certified list of poll-tax payers of this precinct after the election, I find that 126 of them did not vote, and nearly all were Democrats. Why, I have not had time yet to inquire, but you will note that this failure to vote bears out the statements of the peace officers appointed by the presiding judge.
During the course of the election 160 out of the 367 voters who deposited their ballots were sworn, and I believe that if the legal voters only of those 160 had been permitted to vote andthe Democrats of the 126 poll-tax payers who did not get to vote had been permitted to do so that the majority would have stood about 40 in favor of the Democrats instead of 103 against them, as it did result.
Permit me to explain in closing that I had reasons to believe before the election that the Republicans intended to appear in force and with arms at the election, but, under the advice of Judge Welch, I had made no arrangements up to the evening before the election for peace officers of my appointing, but that, when I told him about five o'clockP.M.on November 5th that 30 or 40 strangers from Mexico were in town, Judge Welch told me to appoint whatever number I thought proper to guarantee a peaceable election, but especially admonished me not to have so many as to give the semblance of an armed force at the polls.
Such being my course beforehand, I felt myself morally responsible for the lives of the men I had appointed as peace officers, and therefore never sent them any command during the day to use force in handling the crowd, and that they were all men of good enough sense to see the futility of such a course is shown by the fact that they did not in any instance act arbitrarily.
In conclusion let me add that I had no interest to serve and none at stake in this election, and that my only interest now in submitting this report is to help, as best. I may, in maintaining the majesty of American law and the purity of the ballot box, and the sanctity of the elective franchise thereunder to the utmost confines of this American Union.
I am, Sir, yours sincerely,T.B. Skidmore,Late Pres. Judge of Election in Precinct No. 1 of Starr Co.,Tex., on Nov. 6, 1906.
Duffy has since been murdered.
APPENDIX F
PORTION OF A MESSAGE FROM GOVERNOR T.M. CAMPBELL, REFERRING TO RECENTLY ENACTED LAWS AND THEIR ENFORCEMENT
Austin, January 14, 1909.To the Senate and House of Representatives:
As members of the Thirty-first Legislature, you have each voluntarily undertaken an important task. Your duties are important and your responsibilities are serious. You have assembled under favorable conditions. The State Treasury is on a cash basis. The State is generally prosperous, and the people are contented and happy. The law is supreme in Texas, and all the laws are now very generally enforced and obeyed.
There is no substantial reason to doubt that the welfare of the State and the happiness of the people will be promoted by the intelligence of your work, and by your fidelity to the people with whom you made a covenant at the ballot box. You need make no serious mistakes, as the will of the people has been ascertained upon all important matters which demand the attention of the Legislature at this time.
Organized avarice, though in attempted disguise, can hardly be expected to override the popular will. Selfish interests and those seeking special advantages and exclusive privileges will have their ready advocates on every hand, and wholesome legislation heretofore enacted for the protection of the people will doubtless be assailed. A word of caution is therefore offered to the end that the chosen representative of a confiding constituency may be on his guard. It is not unlikely that designing forces have organized and will be maintained at the Capitol which will test the wisdom, integrity and patriotism of this Legislature.
The laws enacted and the reforms wrought under the present administration in behalf of the great masses of the people of Texas have been under fire for nearly two years, and haverepeatedly received the emphatic endorsement of the Democratic voters of our State, and have been approved and re-affirmed by the organized Democracy in convention assembled. The platform of the opposition party demanded the repeal or modification of many of these important laws, and that party, its candidates and its platform were repudiated and defeated by about 150,000 majority. Desperate efforts have been employed by sinister agencies to discredit these laws, and to defeat the operation of these reforms, but the people have willed otherwise, and the laws have come to stay. Such changes as may be sought by the friends of the laws to strengthen them, and which may be dictated by experience, may, with propriety, be made, but these laws were demanded by the people; they were enacted by their trusted representatives, and in spirit and substance they should stand.
They are just and right and ought to stand. The result of the recent political contests involving these laws and reforms strikingly demonstrate that the agencies of corrupt and sinister special interests can not dominate and control in Texas. The patriotism of our people and the freedom of speech which obtains in Texas make it certain that her incorruptible electorate can be safely trusted to uphold the public official who keeps the faith and redeems his pledges made to them. Those who have contended that modifications and exceptions in their interest should be made in the laws enacted by the last Legislature might have placed their propositions upon the Democratic primary election ticket, and thus tested them at the ballot box, or they could have uncovered their schemes in the last Democratic convention, and these plans were suggested time and again as open to them. This course was open under the law, but they chose rather to undertake the defeat of candidates who stood for these laws. In this they signally failed in every instance. The State Democratic Convention, following the lead of nearly all the county conventions, endorsed the laws as they stood, and placed the party candidates upon a platform committed to their perpetuation. The enemies of the legislation and reforms enacted by the last Legislature chose to submit their demands for repeal, changes and modifications thereof in the Republican State platform, which of course binds all representatives of that party faith. Democrats are bound by party action, by the verdict rendered at the polls, and by the platform made by its convention.
The Democratic platform declaration with respect to the laws enacted during this administration is as follows:
"We heartily endorse * * * the acts of the Thirtieth Legislature enacted in obedience to platform demands, and we rejoice at the emphatic endorsement given said laws and administration by the Democratic voters of Texas in the recent primary election."
"We heartily endorse * * * the acts of the Thirtieth Legislature enacted in obedience to platform demands, and we rejoice at the emphatic endorsement given said laws and administration by the Democratic voters of Texas in the recent primary election."
The measures of commanding importance enacted during the present administration are in the interest of justice, equality, good government and decency. They have resulted in no harm or injustice to any man or to any legitimate business enterprise within this State. The truth of this statement has already been demonstrated, and any effort to emasculate, destroy or weaken them would be a fraud upon the people and a betrayal of the Democratic party. These laws became effective in the midst of a great national panic, and Texas has been and is in a better financial and economic condition to-day than any State in the Republic.
To effect needed reforms and to check evil tendencies, laws were enacted by the last Legislature to the following effect:
1. The keeping of gambling houses and the exhibiting of gambling devices was made a felony.
2. The practice of drinking intoxicating liquors on railroad trains was prohibited.
3. A law passed requiring contests of local option elections to be promptly instituted, and providing that otherwise the legality of such elections should be conclusively presumed.
4. Authority was granted district judges, on proper showing, to prevent by injunction the sale of intoxicating liquors in prohibition communities.
5. A tax of $5,000 was levied on express companies shipping intoxicating liquors into prohibition districts, the effect of which was to take the express companies out of the liquor and saloon business.
6. An effective bucket shop law which prohibits gambling in cotton and other futures, thereby guarding against depression in the prices of the farmers' crops, as a result of unnatural speculative or gambling transactions.
7. To encourage and promote agricultural development, a separate Department of Agriculture was created, and has been organized, and is at this time actively promoting, with the facilities at hand, our agricultural interests.
8. The occupation tax on useful occupations was repealed.
9. A law prohibiting the free-pass evil was enacted.
10. A law against nepotism was passed.
11. Charter fees of corporations were increased in a just and fair amount.
12. The depository law enacted keeps in circulation State funds and the rates of interest secured yields a return largely in excess of the entire expenses of the State Treasurer's office, and provides a handsome yield in interest on county funds heretofore deposited in banks without interest.
13. Laws increasing franchise taxes, and gross-receipts taxes, and securing the listing, rendition and assessment of the railways' intangible values for taxation, were enacted, and their operation has resulted in shifting a large portion of the burden theretofore unjustly borne by the individual property taxpayers to those who had been evading and escaping taxation.
14. A mine inspection law for the protection of laborers engaged in mining business, a law against black-listing, and a law lightening the labors of trainmen, enginemen, and telegraph operators and to protect the public, and other just laws, were passed for the benefit and protection of workingmen.
15. The law known as the "Robertson Insurance Law" having for its object the better protection of the policy-holders in Texas, and to promote investments in our State, was passed. The practical operation of this law is to require the investment of seventy-five per cent. of the Texas reserve of life insurance companies doing business in Texas, in Texas securities, and to require the deposit of such securities in the State Treasury, or other depository designated by the law. It is also provided that the deposit and investment features may be waived by the Commissioner of Insurance upon substantial showing under the terms and conditions of the law.
16. The "Full Rendition Law," as it is called, and the "Automatic Tax Law," having for their respective objects the rendition and assessment of all taxable property at its full value, greater uniformity and the adjustment of the tax rates and tax burdens in keeping with the absolute requirements of the government.
17. A uniform text-book law, providing for the adoption of a uniform system of text-books for all the public free schools of the State was passed.
18. A law prohibiting insolvent corporations from doing business in Texas was enacted.
19. A law prohibiting lobbying, and many other useful laws, were passed in the interest of the people.
In the administration of the State government during the past two years, an earnest effort has been made by the Executive and all other departments of the public service, to give the people a clean, efficient, and economical government.
That the full measure of our success may be ascertained, and the people more fully informed, the most careful and rigid investigation into the administration of every department of government and into the management of each State institution is invited and suggested. That the laws should be properly enforced upon all alike, no law-abiding man will deny. The Constitution provides that "the Governor shall cause the laws to be faithfully executed," and every means and power that could be appropriately exercised has been brought into requisition to meet this mandate of the Constitution. No one should be strong enough to escape the power of the law, and none too weak to receive its protection.
The mandate of the Constitution is clear and the duty of the Governor, with respect to enforcing the law, is plain, but the Governor's powers are not adequate, and adequate statutory powers as contemplated by the Constitution should be promptly provided by legislation suited to present conditions as well as for future contingencies.
Obedience to all criminal laws should be a condition in liquor dealers' bonds, and jurisdiction for suits for breach thereof should be given to the district courts of Travis County.
The transactions of the Treasury Department are set out in detail in the State Treasurers annual report for the fiscal year ending August 31, 1908. The report, together with the tables accompanying the same, contain much useful information, and it is suggested that an examination of the same will be useful and profitable to the legislators.
At the beginning of this administration, the Comptroller estimated the deficit for the fiscal year ending August 31, 1907, to be approximately $300,000, and possibly more. However, as a result of careful and, we believe, efficient administration, aided by more effective revenue legislation, the deficit was avoided, and the State has been able to meet all of its current obligations for the past two years, and at all times to maintain an adequate working surplus in the State Treasury. Instead of a deficit, as predicted, on August 31, 1907, the State had met all of its obligations, and had a cash balance of $692,612.81 to the credit of the general revenue, and at the close of the fiscal year, August 31, 1908, after paying all claims when presented, the State had to the credit of the general revenue fund a balance of $888,985.61.
This very satisfactory financial condition was secured and has been maintained under the operation of the present tax system without additional tax burdens upon the individual property-tax payers. Interests theretofore escaping and property theretofore unrendered have been required, under the new laws, to contribute more to the support of the government, thereby lessening the burden upon those who were under the old laws bearing more than their just share.
To illustrate: Under the operation of the intangible tax law, $173,698,318 of intangible values of railways and bridge and ferry companies were listed for State and county taxes for the year 1908. The physical values of the railways increased under the new rendition law from $100,166,782, in 1906, to $157,822,790, in 1908. The intangible tax law, and the full rendition law has added to the tax rolls more than $250,000,000 of railway and other corporate values theretofore escaping taxation. The credits of money of banks and bankers and of others than banks and bankers are not now being properly listed for taxation; still there has been a great improvement, as the tax rolls show that they were increased from $42,112,424, in 1906, to $80,717,825, in 1908; an increase of more than 91 per cent. These are prominent illustrations of property values heretofore escaping, which, under the new laws, have contributed to the reduction of the ad valorem tax rate of 20 cents on the one hundred dollars in 1906, to the low rate of 6¼ cents on the one hundred dollars in 1908. The average tax rate in the counties throughout the State for 1906 was 55 cents on the one hundred dollars. This average rate of 55 cents was reduced in 1908 to an average rate of 40 cents on the one hundred dollars for county purposes by the operation of the new laws. The individual citizens who have been paying taxes upon their homes and farms at a fair valuation will pay less taxes in 1908 in proportion to value than they have paid for the support of the State government in any year since 1860, and as the receipts from other sources to the credit of general revenue increases, the ad valorem tax rate for State purposes will be reduced in proportion.
Under the operation of the tax laws of the last Legislature,the property values on the tax rolls increased from $1,221,159,869, in 1906, to $2,174,122,480, in 1908. The amount of taxes paid in 1906 on the tax rate of 20 cents on the one hundred dollars, amounted to $2,435,412.92, and in 1908, with the tax rate of 6¼ cents, the total tax amounts to $1,358,826.55; an increase in assessed values of $952,935,411, and a reduction of $1,076,586.37 in the total amount of ad valorem State taxes levied for 1908 as compared with 1906, and a much more equitable distribution of the taxes has been secured.
The valuation of property assessed for taxes, the rates and the amounts of State ad valorem taxes for the years 1906, 1907, and 1908, are as follows:
1906—Valuation, $1,221,259,869; rate, 20 cents; amount of taxes, $2,435,412.92.1907—Valuation, $1,635,297,115; rate, 12½ cents; amount of taxes, $2,040,625.58.1908—Valuation, $2,174,122,480; rate, 6¼ cents; amount of taxes, $1,358,826.55.
1906—Valuation, $1,221,259,869; rate, 20 cents; amount of taxes, $2,435,412.92.
1907—Valuation, $1,635,297,115; rate, 12½ cents; amount of taxes, $2,040,625.58.
1908—Valuation, $2,174,122,480; rate, 6¼ cents; amount of taxes, $1,358,826.55.
Receipts to the credit of the State's general revenue for the year 1906, 1907, and 1908, from special corporation taxes and from all other sources, not including the ad valorem taxes on tangible and intangible values, is shown below; $375,418.94 received from the United States government in 1906 not included:
1906—Amount of receipts $1,826,682.261907—Amount of receipts 2,024,434.801908—Amount of receipts 2,416,218.46
1906—Amount of receipts $1,826,682.261907—Amount of receipts 2,024,434.801908—Amount of receipts 2,416,218.46
The county tax rolls for 1906, 1907, and 1908 disclose the gross inequalities obtaining throughout the State prior to the recent tax legislation, and they further show that an earnest effort was made in the large majority of the counties to comply with the laws respecting rendition, assessment and equalization. In a few counties, however, the law was ignored, and the conduct of the tax officials of such counties was little short of unconscionable. These counties received the full benefits of the reductions in the State ad valorem tax rate from 20 cents to 6¼ cents, and the State school ad valorem rate from 20 cents to 16-2/3 cents, and received the full benefit of the increase in the apportionment of the available school fund, but by the dereliction and disregardof duty on the part of their trusted tax officials they contributed practically nothing to the increase of values resulting in such general good. This is so manifestly unfair and unjust that an effective remedy should be speedily provided by law. It is inconceivable that the oath of office prescribed by the Constitution, to say nothing of the oath prescribed by the new statute, and to which all tax officials must solemnly subscribe, should be so lightly considered by some men who have been honored with official station. Each county and each citizen and corporation of the State should contribute a just share and no more of the taxes necessary to support the State government and to maintain the public free school system, and no county, citizen or corporation through the dereliction of tax officials should be permitted to share in the benefits of reduced rates, and the increase of school funds when they fail to do their part. They should not be allowed by official dereliction to shift their just share of the taxes to the taxpayers of other counties and communities. It is just to say that the people of some of the counties where the law was disregarded repudiated the derelict tax officials upon their first opportunity.
Article 5124e, of Chapter XI, of the Acts of the First Called Session of the Thirtieth Legislature should be amended so that suits for removal from office may be instituted and prosecuted either in the county of such officer's residence, or in the district courts of Travis County, at the option of the Attorney-General. Laws should also be enacted providing that resignations or expirations of terms of office shall not abate action for removal from office, and the law should further provide that county officers who are removed from office for malfeasance or misfeasance or for any dereliction shall not thereafter hold office in this State until their eligibility is established and restored by act of the Legislature.
In this connection, I invite your attention to the respective annual reports of the State Tax Commissioner and the State Revenue Agent. The data and the difficulties encountered in the laws enforcement, and the suggestions made by these faithful officials, will, I believe, be of much value to the Legislature in improving our system of taxation and in enacting legislation to secure equality and more uniformity in the distribution of its burdens.
APPENDIX G
ADDRESS OF THE HON. W.D. WILLIAMS IN REFERENCE TO THE FULL RENDITION LAWS
I am altogether sensible, gentlemen, of the honor which you have done me by inviting me to discuss before you that act of the Thirtieth Legislature of Texas commonly known as the Full Rendition Statute. I am fully aware of the honor done me, as I have said, and yet I am not averse to accepting the invitation. I have heard so much said about this law; I have heard it so wildly praised and so extravagantly denounced; I have heard its promoters and all who were concerned in the enactment so severely condemned on the one hand and so unreservedly lauded on the other; I have read so many editorials in favor of full rendition and so many more against it, that the fever of strife has been set to circulating in my own blood, and I have come at last really to desire to speak my own thoughts on this subject. And especially is this true when I am afforded to-day the opportunity of addressing upon this issue the body of distinguished citizens which is assembled here before me, and which represents the opinions, the aspirations and the sentiments of the commercial classes of my own State. For this too is true, gentlemen, that however much I may in some particulars and on some occasions dissent from the prevailing beliefs of what is called the business world, I am now and always compelled to admit that the leaders of commerce are not only keen of intellect, but that they are full of courage, ready to give weighty reasons for the faith that is in them, loyal and patriotic citizens, commanding the respect and admiration of the world, true and sincere friends and generous adversaries.
That statute, which is generally called the Full Rendition statute, was enacted at the Regular Session of the Thirtieth Legislature, and is published by official authority as Chapter XI on page 459 of the General Laws of 1907. By provisions of this act, assessors are required to list the property for taxation at its reasonable cash market value or, if it has no market value, then at its real and intrinsic value.
Practically this is what is meant by the words "full value rendition," that the rendition shall be at the reasonable cash value of the article or thing which is listed. But it is well settled by repeated decisions of appellate courts that where the word "value" is used in a statute and is not limited either by qualifying words or by the context of the statute, it has the same meaning as if it had been written "reasonable cash market value," or "real and intrinsic value."
So that, as respects its actual intent, the Full Rendition statute brings into operation no new principle and does nothing more than to deprive our assessors of a common excuse, sometimes honestly made and sometimes not, of misunderstanding the meaning of the word "value," as used in former statutes upon the same subject. The act was not intended to and did not introduce a new practice in the assessment of property for taxation, but on the contrary, was aimed at persuading or compelling obedience to methods already established by law, but fallen into partial or total disuse.
The Constitution of 1876, which is now in force, commands that "all property in this State shall be taxed in proportion to its value," and, as already explained, the word "value," as used in this connection, means fair cash market value, or if the article has no market value, then its real and intrinsic. The Constitution fixes the same standard of compensation as does the Act of 1907, and if the latter is correctly designated as a full rendition law then is the Constitution itself also a full rendition Constitution.
Now, when we are inclined to complain of the trials and hardships of the present, it is sometimes the part of wisdom for us to recall for a moment the conditions and circumstances which surrounded us in the past. For it is by such a comparison alone that we may truly know whether our situation has indeed changed for the worse, or whether our complaints are justified.
We have had an ad valorem general property tax in Texas since the beginning of the Anglo-Saxon government within our boundaries. The Constitution of 1836 gave to the legislative department of the Republic an absolutely free hand to shape laws for the raising of a public revenue at its sole will and pleasure. "Congress," so it was written, "shall have power to levy and collect taxes and imposts, excise and tonnage duties." Article 2, Section 1. This authority was sufficiently broad to enable the Legislature of an independent sovereignty, such as Texas then was, to determine what persons and what propertyshould be burdened for the support of the government and what persons and what property should be exempted. There was no limitation upon the power, nor any restrictions to prevent whatever discriminations Congress should see fit to enact.
With this unlimited charter in its hands, the first Congress of Texas met together in October, 1836, the founders of a new nation, a truly representative body, great in intellect, great in character and courage, but greater than all in devotion and loyalty to the eternal principles of right and justice, which are now, always have been and always will be the principles of Democracy also. And those ancient heroes in home-spun, being thus the sovereign legislative body of an independent people, legislating as well for the planter, with his broad and fertile lands, tilled by his hundreds of slaves, as for the wandering hunter and scout, whose Kentucky rifle and pouch of bullets and horn of powder constituted his sole possessions, passed that act, entitled "An Act to raise a public revenue by direct taxation," approved June 12, 1837. And, after this manner, there came into being the first "full rendition" statute, which was also the first statute for the direct taxation of property enacted under Anglo-Saxon domination in Texas.
For, by this act, Congress required all property owners and all agents and representatives of such owners, to make out and deliver to the proper assessing officers inventories showing the value of all their properties, and to swear that same were just, true and faithful valuations and lists. If the assessor believed any valuation offered to him was too low, it was made his duty, summarily and without notice or formality, to call to his assistance two neighboring citizens, to be selected by himself, and the three of them were required to persuade and encourage the reluctant property owner into those straight and narrow paths where duty leads and virtue is its own and only reward. From the assessor and his chosen helpers there was no appeal. That which they said was the full value was the full value, both in law and in fact, and there was an immediate end of the controversy.
In these modern days of frock coats and silk stockings and peace and comfort, we would incline to think that the Act of 1837, which put a "big stick" in the hands of the assessor, would have been sufficiently strenuous to have satisfied even that most strenuous of officers, our worthy President Theodore Roosevelt. But there were mighty men in those old days, when Sam Houstonwas at the head of the Lone Star Republic, and this problem was as meal between their teeth. They enjoyed it to the uttermost. They enjoyed it so much that they could not keep their minds occupied with other things, and, in 1838, Congress amended and strengthened the original "full rendition" bill so as to require every property owner to swear a still harder swear, to wit, that his list was a true and perfect inventory and account of his property and its value. A true and perfect valuation! Think of it, O ye who strain at gnats in these meek and modern day! A most vigorous oath, indeed, was that. Strong and bitter, like the medicines they took in those good old times. And yet I must own to it, gentlemen, that I have nowhere heard or read that either the oaths or the medicines did them any harm.
I have recalled to your recollection those old days of the golden age of Texas for one purpose only, which is that you may be reminded how, in the words of Solomon, "there is nothing new under the sun." There is nothing new, not even our troubles, and I can imagine that, even in the time of the Republic, our citizens desisted momentarily from the lighting of Mexicans and the pursuit of hostile Indians to hold indignation meetings all the way from Nacogdoches to Matagorda Bay, where fierce protests were drawn and adopted, condemning Houston and Lamar and the members of the First Congress for their wickedness in procuring the enactment of a "full rendition" statute with which to oppress and impoverish the Lone Star people.
I, myself, am reminded in this connection of the solemn utterances of some of the daily newspapers, most excellent oracles of Democracy, warning us in editorial columns long that this is a new country, where a continuous stream of bottoms is dropping out of our real estate booms, and that it is a great big mistake to assess our new and fragile values at anything approaching their face. And in my mind's eye, I can see right now one of those ancient and beloved heroes, recently companion to the immortal Davy Crockett, the tails of his coonskin cap fluttering in the wind, addressing an indignation meeting in the days of the First Congress, arousing unlimited enthusiasm with the very same argument which is now so commonly used, founded upon the newness, three-quarters of a century ago, of this country of ours, which some of us profess to believe has not yet grown sufficiently old to tell the truth for purposes of taxation.
The statutes of Texas have always been "full rendition" statutes, and our Constitutions, except for that one which wasadopted in 1836, have always been "full rendition" Constitutions. And, in my judgment, there can be no honest attempt at a fair adjustment of the burdens of a direct tax upon the general property of this or any other country which does not make a decent effort at an equalization in proportion to the true value of each article which is taxed. The true value of an article is necessarily its fair, full value, nothing more and nothing less. If we levy general property taxes, we are compelled to require by law that all property subject to the levy shall be taxed in proportion to its value, and such a rule is inevitably a law for a "full rendition."
If a government were to command that its taxables should be listed at one-fourth their full value, and that a tax of $1 on the $100 should be levied on the values so listed, it would in substance have enacted a law for the taxation of its property, at full value, at 25 cents on each $100, and no amount of figuring can make out of it anything less or anything more.
The proposition that property shall be taxed at one-fourth, or at one-fifth, or at any other fractional part of its true and full value is wholly inadequate to meet any of the objections which are urged against the "full rendition" bill. If a tract of land be assessed at $100 an acre at its full value, January 1, 1908, and by reason of any change in conditions, the value has diminished before the arrival of the tax-paying season, say December 31, 1908, to $50 an acre, and, if it be assumed that it would be an injustice under those circumstances to require the owner to pay a tax in December which is based upon such a valuation, still the slightest reflection will convince you that this injustice has not been obviated by assessing the land at $25 an acre and, at the same time, multiplying the tax rate by four. In either case precisely the same amount of money is exacted from the owner, and, in either case, the tax is in truth based upon the full value January 1st, which we have assumed to be $100 an acre, and no account is taken of any subsequent depreciation.
But, if it be urged that the owner will be better satisfied to pay 25 cents an acre if his land be valued at $25 an acre than he will be to pay the same 25 cents on the same acre upon a valuation of $100, then I can only answer by saying that the Texans with whom I am acquainted are so well fixed with brains that you can not fool them with a trick so transparent as this. If a citizen pays a tax of $50 on a 200-acre farm, he knows thathe is out just $50 in good, common, hard cash, and all the assessors and collectors in the State can not fool him into the belief that he has paid only $40 by showing him how low his land was assessed and how high it was taxed. Having paid his money, he will feel neither better nor worse because of the valuation put upon his property, provided only that he has had a square deal as compared with the other taxpayers.
This is the whole of the tax question, as I see it—to deal justly with every man in the sight of God—to tax every person as nearly as possible in proportion to his ability to pay. And under any ad valorem system the measure of the ability of each individual and the only approximately fair measure which the ingenuity of man has ever been able to devise is found in the reasonable, full value of the taxable property of every owner.
No revenue law is wholly bad which tends in this direction and, on the other hand, every such law is good and valuable in direct proportion as it is so drawn that it will aid in bringing about this all-desirable equality in the imposition of public burdens.
Granting that taxes are apportioned with reasonable fairness, there is but one way whereby an impartial reduction can be had and the benefits of such reduction distributed proportionately and honestly among the taxpayers, and this way is by cutting down the expenses of the government. Every other effort is either the pursuit of a ghost, leaving the pursuer empty handed if he were to succeed in catching it, or it is an effort at tax dodging. The average taxpayer is no shirk, and the very best for which he can hope and the things for which he should always be demanding are, first, an economical administration of public affairs, and, second, the utmost fairness in the distribution of public burdens.
The Constitution of Texas, as I have already shown, has always commanded an equality in taxation, to be attained by levying upon all property in proportion to its value. The laws of Texas have been enacted in obedience to the constitutional mandate, as full rendition laws, but have until the late session of the Thirtieth Legislature failed in one respect, at least, for they provided no adequate means by which they might be enforced. And under these laws, which on the face required a fair assessment, but did not undertake to compel obedience to their provisions, a practice of evasion was begun and spread all over the State, until a condition prevailed which was anarchy, pure and simple. County strove against county and neighbor againstneighbor, each one trying unjustly to shift some portion of his rightful burden to the shoulders of another. It was a reign of lawlessness, gentlemen, when, as some of you members have demonstrated, the average assessment in one county was only 24 per cent. of the value of the property assessed, while the average in another county was as much as 75 per cent. And the remaining counties of the State ranged themselves anywhere you please between these two extremes.
Equality in taxation was a thing dead and forgotten, and honorable people were being taught to look with contempt upon the affidavits which were required to be made before the assessors. A strong and manly people who throughout their history had held the vice of lying in peculiar detestation, were made accustomed to falsehoods, uttered for profit, under the supposed sanction of an oath. A condition prevailed which would in time have compelled the moral deterioration of all citizens.
Now, it is certain that it is one of the most important of the functions of government that it shall secure justice and fair dealing as between all those who are subject to its jurisdiction. But more than this, and more than all else, it is the duty of those who are in control of public affairs that they shall permit no condition to continue which threatens to undermine the moral character of its people. For I venture the opinion that civilization is not builded of capital and labor alone, but that its chief component parts are the love of virtue and the sense of honor and the devotion to truth and integrity which are in the hearts of all persons, and if these good attributes are no longer actuated by these high ideals, then I predict that mankind will have become from that moment forward incapable of maintaining social order.
The practice of undervaluing property for purposes of taxation, which had become common and almost universal in Texas, was destructive of all possibility of justice as between the respective owners, and had in addition thereto a distinct tendency to debase the morals of an uncontaminated and virtuous people. The movement for what I will venture to call purer and better laws did not begin in the Thirtieth Legislature, but years and years ago, and the so-called Full Rendition act of 1907 is merely a mile-stone in the forward march of a progress which has continued throughout the ages, and which will never end.
The statute for the taxation of banks and banking capital is a "full rendition" statute, designed to enable and to requireassessors to list at full value the stocks or properly of such institutions and all funds employed in that particular business. The act for the taxation of the intangible assets of railroads, an act which I had the pleasure of assisting to pass in the Twenty-ninth Legislature, is another "full rendition" law, under the operations of which nearly $174,000,000 of additional railroad values is exposed to view and listed and taxed. These and other statutes of the same kind, which I have not the time to mention, are just and fair, if all other property is also assessed approximately at its value, but they become discriminatory and oppressive as soon as undervaluations of other taxables are purposely allowed.
I am fully aware that there are certain vices which appear to be necessarily inherent in any system that can be devised for the direct taxation of both real and personal property. And while I am not inclined to believe that these vices render this character of tax more difficult of fair apportionment than is any other, yet I would not for a moment attempt to render blind either myself or you to those imperfections and weaknesses of human nature which make it apparently impossible entirely to effect the purpose of any law, no matter how just or wise it may be. But I would remind you that we can not give ground in the face of this argument without abandoning all effort at an orderly rule of society and plunging headlong into the deadly chaos of anarchy. If our inability, entirely and in all cases, to enforce a full rendition law is just cause for the abandonment of the full rendition principle, then, in the same way and for the same reason, we shall be driven from any other plan that we may adopt. Indeed, if we once admit the force of this objection, we must abandon all law, for in no case are we able satisfactorily to enforce any statute which is upon our books.
Remember, gentlemen, I make no pretense that perfection has been attained in the act of the Thirtieth Legislature, or that the act is incapable of improvement. What I am contending is that it is a step forward, and that this body, standing as it does for the ideal aspirations of the business men of Texas, must take no step backward. To repeal this statute, setting up nothing better in its place, retreating to a condition of which you, as thoughtful and patriotic citizens, must have been sick at heart, may bring us to have "fewer laws," but I am not able to persuade myself that those laws which are left will thereby have become any the better.
In my judgment,ex parteaffidavits, which have the effect of making the truth cost money and of rewarding falsehood as if it were a virtue and not a vice, ought not to be exacted in any but the rarest of cases, and only where no other source of information can reasonably be found. And, for this reason, I have long preferred that the visible property of the State should be valued and assessed by the assessor rather than by the owner. But I am greatly in the minority in my opinion of this subject, and because that opinion is of absolutely no consequence, I refrain from enlarging upon it.
Proceeding, then, along the only road which is open for travel, and assuming that each owner shall continue to fix theprima facievalue of his own assets, it can not be successfully denied that the interests of society demand that such valuation shall be made under oath, and that the value stated in every affidavit shall be the true, full value and not an arbitrary, assumed and fictitious proportion of the same.
The "full rendition" law, considered in connection with other statutes in force upon the same subject, provides an admirable system of local equalization, and tends in a very considerable degree toward equalization throughout the limits of Texas.
But this is a State of vast areas and of prodigious distances, and in any such widely extended territory it seems to me that the physical conditions alone are sufficient to demand the enactment into law of some method of apportionment which will not depend entirely upon local views and local sentiments. It must be kept in mind that, while the Attorney-General may sue to remove from office any assessor or member of a board of equalization whom he believes to be guilty of intentionally accepting undervaluations, yet, convictions for such offenses are always difficult to secure and the prosecution of the vast majority of such cases would be no better than a farce. The State government is practically without power to compel reasonable assessments in any county or section where the citizens are largely opposed to full rendition. The administration has no legal authority which it can effectually use, but must confine itself to moral suasion alone, and in controversies where interested parties are arrayed upon opposite sides, we, as a people, have never regarded moral suasion and merely moral responsibilities as a sufficiently effective force to be worthy of serious mention. We will not permit a judge to hear a case in court, or a juror to sit on a jury where either the plaintiff or the defendant is relatedto him within the third degree, either by blood or marriage. Arbitrators must be without interest and not related to the parties, and, in general, wherever an act is authorized which may affect the rights of others, the law is vigilant in requiring that the officer or person acting shall be disinterested and impartial. Everyone will agree that these precautions against injustice are right and necessary, and yet I can conceive of no good reason why interested parties or their relatives may not be permitted to adjudge any other disputed claims quite as well, and with just as large a probability that justice will be done as when they were asked to determine what amount of State taxes they will pay.
A compulsory equalization of some character seems to me the next step to be taken in the forward march toward fairer taxation in Texas. We have come a long way from that original plan of 1837, by which an assessor and two neighbors arbitrarily determined what a property owner should pay, but we are still very far from home. Nor should this occasion surprise, for if the law is to be worthy of respect, if it is to be in any way effective as a force for the right, it must not be fixed and unchangeable, but, on the contrary, must be capable of infinite variety and infinite development, growing with the growth of the people who are its creators and enforcers, eternal in seeking justice, but flexible in adapting itself to the present.
In conclusion, gentlemen, permit me to call to your attention very briefly a few of the effects of the new tax laws. For if we are to return, as at least one candidate for high office is insisting, to the old order of things, we are abandoning not merely the so-called Full Rendition law, but all other of the recent enactments upon the same subject. We are to abandon the intangible tax law, the franchise tax law, the law taxing the gross receipts of certain corporations, and all other of the statutes of the Twenty-ninth and Thirtieth Legislatures by which a fairer adjustment of the burdens of government was sought to be secured. And if we abandon these laws we must abandon their undeniable benefits as well as their doubtful disadvantages, and pay taxes as we paid them in the good old times.
Now, in 1906, when these laws were either tied up in court or not yet in force, the property owners of Texas were called upon to pay a total ad valorem tax for the expense of the State government of $2,443,637, but in 1907 the ad valorem tax for State expenses was reduced to $2,044,566. The operation of thenew tax laws reduced the burdens put upon property owners by $400,000, and of the amount which property was still required to pay, something near $214,000 was levied upon railroad intangibles. The saving upon the general property, aside from railroad and corporation taxes, was $614,000 for that single year, for State expenses alone. In the same way, the saving for the year 1908 will not be less than $900,000 on State expenses, not including the school fund.
It can not be successfully denied that the new tax laws have tended largely toward an equitable distribution of tax burdens and that in doing this they have diminished the amount paid by the average citizen. The intangible assets tax alone brought in a revenue for 1907 of $1,470,000 to the State and its counties, and cost for its administration the insignificant sum of $2,650, a result which can not be surpassed in the history of governmental finance.
These are the triumphs which we are asked to abandon by returning to that system where "the assessors under the commissioners courts made the assessments as under former laws."
Now, gentlemen, I for one am not disposed to retreat. I am intending to go forward, not backward. And in the course which I am determined to pursue I am expecting to go arm in arm in the company of the most of those who are here to-day as the representatives of commercial Texas.