Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1869-08-11

II is claimed that real estate lorm4 the great
bulk Of the property of the State. is stable and
imporishoblc and furnishes the only sure basis
for taxation, and therefore no deductions should
be allowed to the owners of tlis elias. off nroperiv
for their indebtedness. The stability and inner
ishnblo character of real property make the cg- /
penso Of It's protection less than that of movable
pershabe pers1nal propertv If fbe Consfitp,
ton requires every Glass of 1ropertv 10 be tnyol
to nav H. proportiop of the expeuse of proteof.n
IL would seem that equal IL not woirlter ren.,r.
exist for allowing deductions for debts 10 tl,e
owners of real. than for such allo,nnce to tle
owners of personal propertv.
The Consultation spens d, r,ntemplate "a i,v
upon the person together with the oilionti.n III
personal service i'm the timo of war 10 deiray tlo
expense Of protecting life and Ihertv and "a tiv
upon propertv 30 defr,v the rxuen.n of nrotertip,
property n Tins be- 50, why thnuld unt All tr,.,
erty. without deductions Er lebts be- taxed tr'r
the b1sis of itg 90 trur value iu tpoue,'9 Ruf ir.
deductions for debts are tl be allowed nre there
any good reason. why this allowance should be-
conceded t0 the owners of one elH.s of ur,parfy
and denied 90 the owners of nu1tlcr cas. off nr.r
crty and can it Doe slid tIat taxes levied ttpip
this basis urc Justly hm"2
Within the last twenty five year. there have
been created within the State various railroad
telegraph and express o.,pponieq tlrt,,r.,t. b ls
extendinp their hnnchi.es and rr,pertv tbr,nrl
scycrl towns. which have received t6eir cxi.f.
ence their rights and privileges from the hand of
the State TIE granting of WHOSE charters tbc
settling of who's RIGHTS and uriyiIegs. md ,I'e
protection of whose property. have occupiei ~
inc0nsidemble portion of the time and nitontion
of the Legislature and of the c,urts and lar,ol,
increased the expenses and taxes of tho St,te
These, it would SEEM under the provision of the
Consultation. should contribute their pr5p9rti1n
towards the expenses and taxes of the State.
Such has not been the c1se excrpt 10 "a VERY, linn,
tied extent This result hn. been due to ,ari0us
causes In their inception the mlneyed value li
the franchises and property of these corporation.
was supposed % be represented hv their aauital
stock. The Legislature seems % have proceeded
upon the theory that it is preferable 10 INK the
stock of these c0rplntilns directly som how
ever. the franchise and propertv of the-a c,rf.,
mti0ns ia many cases passed from the hands af
the stockholders into the hands of the bJnIbDld-
ers and the stocks of such c,rflroti,r- L,..,,.
worthless NO attempt was made to tax tb,t
proportion of these .tocks owned bv non-rcsiients
till lrjl During chat wear the legislature pr.,. !
Nidcl that stock owned bv uon-resdcpt. welding /
t0 such owners profit or dividend of Six or conf
on It's par value, should pnv a speeife tay of ,ne
Der cent of that value To- tIe State Tre,spror
IL j. difficult TO see why property of this co.s
having q monoved value Welding a les. pr,ff my
dividend than six per cent. on lis uar value
should go untaxed while all other classes Of prop
erty are taxed ON their value i'm money re,r,rdls.
Of whether they welded profit or dividend m tle
owner or how taxes impised i,,r tbis l,.i. MO
I
IL wa. claimed that tlis lo,, i,rr.,.ir.- fi . ]
ci6c tax up,n dis ciass of r,r,r,,rt, ti7'5
il i'm a manner different fr,p WHAT ie tb,r 49,,
ertv of tbe State was ,tr,.,,,.tit,til
and tbe noyunnt of tLe inv r,sistcj rh, r.,t
dcri-i.r ~ tbe Snnro,.n 90. a. IL r--i,.'ii
Stote- la. .s,i.tanti5tc3 tli..l,i,, H.,
tbe rr.-.,t tr,e i, -.;,lt , lt ~ N ~
7 of propert, have besp taye1 prJ.,IJ ,,.. ,',,
one. .Lnpjreltb mart ,g tle,.,.b ,,le n +I,.-
ertv and franchises of these corr,rtiops bas tls
D
The estimated yalue IT ms ,I.s- ~ ,,r,,..,
i'm the State /. from fliesr T., t,yent, Tiii; -
dnI.rs Reeeivin,, tle;r evi.t..r,,, ,;.i,.. III
priyile.,e- their ,1n ,rts,,,i,,, ami tba7 ~ ,l
pr,uerfy from the Sfate thc Corstit,ti.,, r,-
t,,ir,s tl,es ,,,,.,,,-, tio,. ~, 4r;t,,t, .i;
51rtiop 1f tbe exnensc r tb,t r,r,toti,, H.,
nronerty and franchises or tbdss C,r,,4,-ti'.ry
valued op the same b,sis am which tba reol ,,r,
r.,rt,. IN tLe St,.e h. ,,.,,, ,.,t,,J III E l
+, not les. than five millions r d,lI,rs and ,i
as other nr,pertv ;s toved ,,,ul5 o,. f., - ,,
a,,,ai sIr, M ,,t C,r l, , Ill - -, .''i
dllars Ne,rl,, tlis s,,, Loe bse,, I'm, c a
nuoilv l,st IN the state and carsc1rar,ti,. '',
Le,yier L,y1en or t,v,ti,1 nj , e
CLASSES of t,r,f,ert,, and tb,t t, ,vLil ID
tho r,sterinq care of The STATE The s,,.,;,,. f
tbe.e COMBINATIONS hive Icon e,e,'liiy and rrl,
I ;,,.,.s,.;rs, 'N''''
In the 6pinion of the committee the sy.to,, ,,l
taxing the stock represoi,tin, tbis cass III nrr.r
IA, ie 1uc1fial ana upiust III tbs yssiJept ,,,l,,
oi stock alone are uxed, tie nonresident st5et
holder not only has his property protected nj t1r
expense of the stare, and contributes n5thinq ~
wards that expense. but has an undue adynutas,
over the resident stockhoder. If both resident
and nonresident stock should be taxed alike. moi
only iunumomhle difficulties and c1mplientioo.
viii arise in the Collection Of the taxes agajnsf
nonresident stockholders, bat all those corpor1-
hti0ns whose franchise, and pronerty have hllm
into the hands of bondholdefs will esraue repder-
ing the latter class OF corporations more iuyitiD,
90 capitalists than the former. In the opinion "a
the committee the best way of eiIectiny n iust
contribution from these corporations, towards tbe
expense of their protection for the State to trc,
them in this respect, as it treats individuals tax
them directly and not through their stockbolier..
constitute the first lister of each town tbr,urb
which the franchise and property or the corpor, I
ton extends or a select number of men. n hoarl
of as, essol to apprase the franchise and property
of such corporation ri its value in money. and 10 /
distribute the same between such towns in ur',-
portion 10 the comparative value Of the same in
each town. let the sum thus distributed To each
0