Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1881-08-03


WATcHMANs grand list comparisons b
which it was shown that Montpelier, anon
the towns, and Washington among the coun
ties, of the state will bear this year more thai
of these comparisons the PhGnir says; "W'
haven't the slightest idea that the WATcH
MAN has Windham county in view when i
speaks of certain towns which have beer
recreant to their sworn duty, and havt
shirked portion of their burdens upon thei
more honest neighbours Justice compel'
us to say, however, that careful observation
has convinced us that the listers of Brattle
boro, and Windham county generally, per
formed their duties with sincere purpos,
TO obey the letter of the law and do equa
and exact Justice to all. If their conviction:
or conclusions didn't square exactly with
those of listers in Montpelier and Washing
ton county, it was not lack of conscen
tiousness.' Possibly careful sitting of the
facts would show that Windham county ha:
for several years been listed at figure sc
much higher in proportion than some of its
neighbors that it has been paying more than
its share of state taxes, and under the
pressure of the new law the difference has
been made unpleasantly manifest"
We certainly had Windham county and
Brattleboro in view," for we named them
among several others, but we had no inten.
tion of singing them out and making a
direct personal application of our remarks
to them as SINNERS above all others +" in the
matter of differentiation, for other towns
and counties present graver "inequalities" in
this matter than do these. Our purpose was
to show that, although long approach has
been made toward equalization as between
individual taxpayers, the necessity for equal
ization between the different counties of the
state still exists. This necessity can be made
still more apparent In the comparisons
referred to we gave no figures. 1t appeared
among other things that Franklin and Wind
ham counties have larger population and
larger area of valuable lands than Wash
ington, but that each of these counties have
smaller valuation,-Franklin being in fact
over two and one-half million, and Wind
ham nearly one million seven hundred thou
sand, dollars smaller As matter of figures
comparison would show that Windham
has a population one thousand three hun
dred larger than Washington that Wind
ham has an area of 461 $50 acres, Washing
ton, 3SS, 493,-an excess in favor of Wind
ham of 1908 acres. The total valuation of
Washington is reported at $l4, IA, 215, of
Windham 12,462, 967, that is, a county
with one thousand three hundred more peo-
pie and 1908 more acres of better land
than Washington is appraised nearly $780,
600 less.
As between Montpelier and Brattleboro
the figures are Population of the former
town, 1920, area, 4,242 acres; of the latter
population, 5,SS2, area, 19,26l acres. Mont
pelier's appraisal is, real estate, 81, S35 ,2O6
personal property 81, 7O7, 164; total, $685.
372. Brattleboro's appraisal is, real estate,
sl,S6O,0S9; personal property, $l,244 ,246
total, $3,104,335. In other words, Brattle-
boro, having nearly five times as many acres
as Montpelier, double the population, and
very extensive manufacturing and industrial
interests besides, appraises its real estate at
about the same figure as the latter town, and
its personal property about $i50,000 less.
There are no physical or material features
in the conditions of the two towns that ex-
plain this incongruity of results, and it is
certainly a curious circumstance that two
bodies of listers subscribing to the same
oath faithfully to carry out the provisions
OF the same law, in the discharge of similar
duties, could conscientiously arrive at
conclusions so unreasonable. Evidently the
convictions or conclusions of either the
Montpelier or the Bratteboro listers need to
be adjusted by "square" that will not vary
so widely and so inexplicably. 1t matters
not what ga careful sitting of the facts
would show" as to Windham's apprasals
under the old law; that has no bearing upon
her duty under the new law. Still, COM
parison of the lists of the town and county
in question under the old appraisals would
show relatively more natural result than
that obtained under the recent appraisal.
Both the Phanir and the Retormer doubt
the efficacy OF an equalizing board for the
adjustment of these inequalities, but seem
to regard the taxation of corporations as the
best way to raise revenue to pay state ex-
penses. If the state board of equalization
is not equal to the duty it was created to
perform, let the legislature recast it with
new and stronger provisions that will make
it means of justice and equity, instead of
injustice and iniquity," as the Phanir
quotes gentleman's characterization Of the
board. The Free Press suggestion in this
connection that " the grand jury would be the
best 'equalizing board in some localities "
is exceedingly pertinent, aud its enforce
ment against few boards of listers would
give equalization by an honest discharge of
duty healthy impetus. When the advo-
Gates of the idea of raising all the state rev.
enues by taxing corporations present some
well digested and practicable plan for carry
ing their scheme into effect, with provisions
as compact and well defined as those of the
present law even, the comparative merits of
the two systems may be intelligently dis
cussed. Vermont is an agricultural state.
1t is not rich in corporate wealth. The state
has been granting bounties to encourage the
growth of the manufacturing interests of
the state, rightly judging that its agricul-
tural interests also will thereby be advanced.
1t would not be consistent nor is it at all
probable, that the state will now turn round
and saddle its corporations with the entire
support of the state government. But every
corporation in the state should pay its Just
and equitable share of taxation, and legis-
lation should direct its attention honestly
and resolutely towards enquiring into the
matter OF taxation of corporations and the
enactment of constitutional laws that shall
compel corporate property to pay its fair
share of the taxes. 1t is to be deplored that
the last legislature did not create an able
and impartial commission to investigate du.
ring thepresent biennial term this whole sub
ject of taxation and report to the next legis-
lature. Such an investigation and report
would have been reliable basis for legisla-
ton, and the assurance of the passage of lust