The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-12-15

Subtle health. This IL nuisance OF very long
standing, and which, In the opinion OF our every
prominent physician, is dsmnable and should DO
abated.
OUR REsTRICTIONs ON COMMERCE.
Meeting Last Night Of the Legislative
Committee on the subject.
Last evening the committee on commercial re-
strictions met at their room In the Cotton Ex-
change present, Dol. zacharie, Adolphe schrie-
bsr and q. J. Berry.
After the reading OF the minutes Of the previous
meeting and their adoption, Col. Zaoharie. the
chairman, stated that during his absence from
the city he had devoted his time In Chicago, Bal
timors, New York. Philadelphia and Washington
ID the subjects which come under the purview
of the committee.
released on oil professions and business except
that On real estate, aud the result was that the
amount realized had been largely Increased. The
result Of this was that many industries hsd been
removed TO that city. The Delameter Iron
Works have been removed to Chester. and the
result was very great increase In receipts. He
fh0nght that sub committees should be appointed,
and eAch member should be assigned certain
questions bearing on the subjects OF the commit
tees investigation.
referring 10 the work OF the Baltimore COM
mission, Col. zacharie said thst they had entered
into correspondence with the best known politi-
cal economists Of this country and England. The
Baltimore commission exempted all tools and
machinery used in manufactures
Mr. Berry desired to know whether newspapers
under this rule were exempted.
Col. zacharie stated that 40 he understood it
such was the case. The only taxation that there
ntal or personal property. The tables attached
'3O this report show that whilst Baltimore trade
stsgnant, Philadelphia Ia thriving in trade.
Die latter CITY employs fully 5000 men more than
&lew York. Referring to work he recently had
Efcured, be read ut length from report concern
THE PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM.
#Tfie ID In substance the Pennsylvania system
4 liz system which has been reduced to practice
snMd found 10 effective and 90 beneficial in the
adjoining State--the system under which Penn
nylvAnia has grown 90 rapidly In riches and popu
lAtion since 1865.
That system, IL 10 to be remarked, WAS not
originally adopted 30 much as matter OF choice
- matter OF necessity. The difficulties between
different localities In regard to superintendent
hid grown 10 great that IL was impossible to get
fair assessment, and the State and city we're
suffering for lack Of sufficient basis Of taxation.
In Philadelpha the personal property basis had
dwinded TO less than "a GOO GOO ls3 737 1850, and
She tax rate was 81 per st00, with steady and
constantly increasing deficit.
Under such circumstances change OF some
sort was imperatively necessary, and wise ooun-
sci secured change In the right direction. The
State relinquished entirely the taxation of real
tAte, the cities and counties practically gave up
the taxation OF personal property, and thus the
great obstacle TO true valuation and an impair
tisl assessment of property was at once removed.
MIR. George Fl. Andrews emphatcally SAYS of
this improvement that "the tax system Of Penn
eylvania, adopted within the past ten years, IL
nifty years In advance OF the method prevail ng In
New York; and MIR. Thomas Cochran, for many
years ut the head Of the board OF assessors in
Iclasses Of property to tax, not only simplifies
yssxation, ''but lie the only mode by which COM
piance with the law In any OF the counties can be
accomplished, and that tax rates on real estate,
Tor State and county purposes. are an insupera-
BILE obstacle TO equalization" In other words, 30
long as two independent powers tax the same
OAsect, there must be s'friction and contention"
% know this to be the case here In this State.
new assessment law was passed by the
|x&kpre OF the outlying counties to have their
& Of taxation reduced, and In the hope that
souid DO large increase in the ASSESS
~ Baltimore and its vicinity.
secSS IN be doubted that the State assessors in
aSsSVssS ent localities were not free from these
". YgsSNlsS which must have influenced the trainers
I EN//tY In the assessment Of 1867 q case
n. 8x $40 mich illustrated the effects Of this
49,. NSSASpusy between sections.
III Il: asN In Baltimore county. immediately
N. SseAh exactly the same natural and ar
!. sSH sr $Scatages, were assessed, the one at
N. sSs an acre, the other ut thirty dol
,N 40 The reason OF this was that the
4NxSR Il. between the two farms was the
&NSSS$& M the two assessment districts, aud
IN sSs ESA \. In one district had quite different
blfStS xSS Il. Ard TO the acreage value OF land in
%SsNs1.. tom that held by the assessors in
NsgsS<S. Act. This is an instance Of what
Ns ~ ~ send, OF New York. meant In say
u IN Asyt not an assessment roll in this
y thf MAJ Es n not both work and tell GAs.o