Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1883-03-28
The Revenue Bill.

journal q chance to make this dlscov er.
and to have precedence in announcing
10 the public. No one else coming to thu
front to claim the honor, he diilidentl.
rises in his place in the agriculture
columns of the above paper and takes
himself He thinks the law is especially
unjust toward The railways. "a road" III
says, doing a business of $4,000 pc
mile may be doing more profitable
business, and is, of course, a more valuable
property in comparison with its cost than
a road which does $4,000 per mile" Th'
former, he shows, is taxed two per cen
on its gross earnings, while the latter i
similarly taxed on $4,000 and at a rat
one per cent higher for each additiona
$1,000 of gross receipts. The profits o
a railroad" he continues, ''or any othe
business are by no means certain to be il
the same proportion as its gross receipts
and, of course, the property is of more ol
less value according TO its net receipts OF
profits" All true enough, nc doubt; bu
it is difficult TO see in what essentia
particular Mr.. Tinkham's Hypothetical
railways differ from two farms whose
acreage and productiyeness may vary just
as his railroads differ The larger farm
in the ordinary cou Sc of things, would
be listed the higher and pay the larger
tax, although the smaller farm may be
doing more profitable business" By a
graduated scale of rates the Hooker bill
seeks to reach the additional value OF
increase OF railway property which Target
receipts imply There seems to be nc
greater injustice to the railway than to
the farmer. Assessing for taxation is not
an exact science. The revenue law, no
more than its elder brother, the listing
law, is free from faults. Perfection in
either is unattainable. Each aims to &c
Justice to the people, and We believe tie
agricultural editor of the FREEMAN has
failed to convince his readers that the
revenue act, either as it affects railways
or any other corporations, exceeds in
inequitableness The listing acts under
which the farmers were paying take
while corporations were paying none Or
the amended act under which for two
years to come they will be taxed. Inequity
in either is not designed. If it exists it is
because perfect adjustment of 1.-The
burdens of taxation" is impossible
1FdtchNan.
From the lofty attitude of "A general
editor it may seem presumptuous for IN
agricultural editor to express or hold
opinions Oh any subject other than agri-
culture, but taxation is a matter which
farmers have been sufficiently familiar
with in the shape of paying that we
consider it q topic quite in our line.
Besides this, it often chances that Il per
sons own estimate Of his importance and
rights and privileges is not fully shared
by the general public, so we shall have
plenty of company if we assume too
much, and we shall claim the right to
discuss in these columns with such ability
rs we may any question which we consider
of general interest, feeling certain that if
We 60 far wrong, some general editor
will set us right.
We think the IVGtchman gives Il wrong
impression of our article, and would
convey to the reader the idea that we
objected to the law as especially unjust
toward railways only, us it makes no
mention Of the other, and perhaps more
striking instances which we noted in other
corporations.
First it will be noticed that the Watch.
m1n does not deny the injustice OF the
law, but supports it with the most logical
and conclusive argument that other laws
also work injustice and that it believes we
have failed to convince the readers of the
FREEMAN that it exceeds in "incqUitable
ness some other laws. An argument
which is based on the premises that
because one law is not moro unjust than
another law confesscdly unjust, that
therefore the first is right is simply I'M
answerable. But the IFdtclmdn drops
into agriculture when it speaks Of taxing
farms. 1t is not at all in the ordinary
course of things" that the larger farm
would be listed higher, and just here is
where the root of the injustice of the law
lies. Here are two farms The town
elects appraisers who are sworn to APP
praise these two farms (and al others and
other properties) at their true value.
Quality and condition of soil, location.
condition of buildings, the amount Of
stock il will keep, etc, etc all goes in TO
make up the value equally wi h the
number of acres, and one per cent If
such valuation is set in the grand list"
ON which all taxes are assessed equally.
Here is the princip'e Of exact oqnaluy,
and however weak and errn9 pDJr NOR
tails may prove in carrying it out, the
principle, the foundation of the method of
taxation is right equally, Justice and in
the phrase, "liSted higher" lies IN impol-
tant ference, as against taxed higher.
The first is II matter Of Judgment;
taxing is Il matter OF judicial cXactn, S.
III listing, people familiar with The prop
crty appraise its value, and tie lax is
levied on that valuation In the revenue
Law, Il stated tax is laid on property
without its value being assessed,
The IEatchman says truly "pclirctiOn
in either is unattainablc," but one really
hungering for perfection would hardly
assert rs proof of his advanced stage on
the road to ii, that he knew he started
wrong but there we're others rs bad or
worse than he.
The laws heretofore have specified Il
way in which fund or "list' was
provided for the assessment of taxes, and
on this every personal list was taxed an
equal per cent. The revenue bill lays
direct tax on certain parties from which
all others are exempt, and from our place
in the agricultural columns of the FREE
MAN, we boldly assert our firm belief that
the principle is wrong and will work rank
injustice, and if tie principle be accepted
and acted upon it will only require Il
sufficient power in the legislature TO
extend its provisions in other directions
and 10 still greater degree of injustice,
as Judge Doe SO clearly sets forth in the
extract of his opinion which we gave.
-%-~-$----