, 1877-04-19
crcated In any State that has not becn found
10 he nuisance, both on account Of its
delays, tho use1essness of iGs decisions, and
the increased costs OF litigation.


We pIlut 4etteF lEOul 5eu1tOF "A4I4H0 Ou
the kubicot Of taxing capital stock. There
nto two bills pen1,ng in tho Legislature.
One of these Is to authorize reassessmcnt
of tho capital stock Of the various railways
for tho taxes for tho years 1879, ~, snd ~,
these new assessments to take place Of the
old ones. Tho importance Of this bill may
bo judged from tho fact that In 1879 Tic
assessment Of the capital atock Of tho raii-
way companies was $133, 600, 600 upon
tangible property Of only $es, SOC, 600, leny-
Ing the companies to pay tax on tho value
OF tue tangible property and on sC4, 900
additional, representing tho difference bo-
twecn tue value Of this property and the
supposed valuo Of the certificates OF shares
representing the same property. Tho assess.
mont Of tho sa,ne railroads In 1876 WAS on "
$4,000, 600 for tangible property and $io,-
0oo,ooo Of double taxation called capitaf
stock. II Is notorious that Tho majority of
tho companies whose capital stock WAS put
down In 1873 at $133, ,00o, 900, or double u,at
Of the value Of tie whole property, wero
then bankrupt, and that since then their
capital stock and indebtedness have largely
ceased 10 exist they hnye disappeared like
smoke. Tho assessment for 1915 Is con-
fession Of tho injustice of tho assessments for
1879, IT, and 10.
There Is, however, another bill which
proposes to amond the Revenue law by
dropping the whole business Of taxing CAPT.
tnl stocl;-that H., OF taxing the same prop
erty second time undor another na1no; and
we do not understand how the State Gnu
avoid doing this un1osa 1t ertend the rules
for taxing capisalstoct to TINT Of taxingrrivato
property. II privato corporation own farm
and mango It so ably that 1t produces tho
company n largo profit, Tho ownorH aso at
p1osont taxable not only OH tho value Of tho
land, as their neighbors aro, hut they aro
nlso taxable on tho value Of the capital
stock which represents tho land. 4 similar
firm, equally profitable, but owned by unin-
corporated individuals, IL only taxed upon
tho land. Why this discrimination? The
only bnsis or excuao for ta1ing tie title to
corporate property in tho form Of shares Of
stock is that Of supposed or nctual profit
from tho investment, which is simply nh in
cotne-tax OH profits.
Now, If income or profits ara to bo taxed
in the case Of companies, how can they 10
avoided In tho case Of individuals, and still
havo taxatton Uniform? In reaching after
the intangible and oftentimea imaginary,
Senator Wu111Na overlooks tho fact That lie
IL violating every principle Of uniformity.
Property can have but Quo raluo for taxable
purposes. When tho Assessor values oil tho
property Of corporation or individual, lo
| crhausts tho functions Of assessment That
assessment may bo amended, corrected, on
1argol, Of reduced but tho State cannot
/ Justly assess aud tax tho land and also tho
! titie-doeas TO Tho sa1no 1and It caunot
duplicate assessments and taxation by listing
tho sanlo property undor two forms or
uamcs. II cannot assesa aud tax mans
money In Tho bank md also tar
tho bauk-book showing tho condition
| OF his deposit-acoount, It cannot aaaeas and
tax mans hogs and sheep, and also assesa
and tax the receipt for tho money paid for
them; mud 1t cannot nsscss au1 tax horse,
mud at tho samo timo asgoas and ta1 zach of
four owners Of tho animal on one-fourth OF
It's value in addition to tho assessment on
tho horse. Tie substance and shadow can.
not both be tarcil. II Alr. N1uTtSu wants to
tar incomes and profits, lot linn SO provide,
md lot 1t apply to everybody In the stato
nliko, and not to tho property Of individuals
only who 'aro cooperating together under q
corporate namo authorized by the State.