“When the tax was two per cent and the rents, six per cent, the owner got clear the equivalent of six per cent on two thirds of the value of the property. But when the tax was increased to 4 per cent, he got the equivalent of six per cent on only one third of it. Thus his net income being reduced to one-half of what it was, the selling and buying value of the land was likewise reduced one-half. This made no difference to the tenant paying rent, he still had to pay the same, but, two-thirds instead of one-third now went to the state. But within the corporate limits of Minneapolis, St. Paul and other cities, there was a great amount of unused land, that produced no rent. This unused land constituted about three-fourths of the total areas of those cities and represented one-third of their total land valuation. The very first assessment of the new tax was the signal for the reduction in the value of all this property, fifty per cent or more at once, and every acre was immediately thrown upon the market. By the time of the next assessment the assessors were obliged to recognize this depreciation, and so all this land was returned at half or less than half of what it had been. The loss of tax money thus sustained had to be made up by a higher rate, and the second levy was placed at 5 per cent instead of 4 per cent. This worked a further reduction in the values of unoccupied lots and by the time of the third assessment these lots were estimated as having only the value of farm or garden lands; and so it became necessary to still further increase the rate of taxation, which was now established at six per cent.