Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1885-03-23
This TAX Question,


RALEIGH C. g., W. Va, March l6.-The
communication by Mr.. Bell, of the late Lax
Commission deserves notice, because
whether so intended or not, it is calculated
to mislesd the public. He says that he wa
present at only three Of the early sessions of
the u eommittee; that none OF the N
portsnt provisions were considered on these
occasions; that he had no opportunity to
give his views respecting the sections which
embraced the vital principles Of the bill;
that he wished to correct any impression
that be was consulted about, or had any
thing to do with the odious features which
distinguished the BILL" that the Chairman
Of the subcommittee and other leading
members of the majority seemed under the
lead of Mr.. Mason, and to be saturated with
bis extreme ideas.
/ would state that the Committee invited
Mr.. Bell and Mr.. Mason to attend its meet.
ings. There was no serious difference Of
opinion only on two points. Col. Byrne
and myself were entirely clear that the
Legislature could not under the present
Constitution, exempt manufactured articles
&c. We considered o~urselye compelled to
conform the statute to the Constitution, and
to do so, we could only exempt such prop
erty as came within one or the other OF the
different classes mentioned in the Constitu-
ton. Mr.. Dawson was understood to adyo-
cate retaining all present exemptions. This
matter was repeatedly discussed, and re.
member that Mr.. Bells views were IN &C
cord with Mr., Dawson's. Mr.. Mason insist
ed that we ssould strain the language OF
the Constition and exempt whatever was
unusually exempted in other States, but he
agreed that we could not exempt manutac-
tured article &c. The deduction OF debts
was the only other point on which there was
q serious difference Of opinion. The mat
ter came up at every meeting; Mr.. Bell
and Me-. Dawson argued that q mans entire
Indebtedness should be deducted from the
value of his property, as | understood then
Mr.. Mason and myself insisted that debts
should be deducted from credits, but no;
from investments. Col. Byrne said that he
felt compelled by his oath to support the
constitution to abolish all deductions
Finally section 81 was drafted in the words
printed in the subcommittee bill.
The draft of the subcommittee bill was
very rough and was only intended to strain
out the many unqueslioned defects in the
present statute, and to make the above
mentioned two material changes. As soon
as the bill was printed the Finance Com
mittee Of the Senate and House, held an in
formal meeting at which the subject of de-
Quoting debts was discussed, Mr.. Bell being
present. The Joint Committee held two
and perhaps three more conferences. After
several free discussions as to the policy OF
deducting debts, a motion was made
to strike out section 81, which mo-
ton was lost by a considerable veto;
subsequently, at another meeting, the mo-
ton was renewed and carried. But there
was, as1 understood it, a general under.
standing that q claim to permit debts to be
deducted from credits would be so worded
as 10 harmonic conflicting opinions, and
with this view the bill as reported to the
Senate, (known as Senate bill ll9,) has a
vacancy between sections so and 81. This
is conclusive that it was never contemplated
to pass the bill without some provision on
this subject.
/ desire to coutrovert the impression made
by Mr.. Bell where he refers to the extreme
visws entertained by Mr.. Mason. l desire
to say, and | am sure ! will be confirmed,
not only by Col. Byrne and Mr.. Dawson, but
BY every one who was present at any of the
meetings, that 80 far from entertaining ex.
treme views, Mr.. Mason erred, ifhe erred at
all, in the opposite direction. l found him
extremely conservative and thoroughly
posted on the subject oftaxation, and he rem
dered invaluable service. l believe that If
q bill had been prepared according to his
advice it would have been entirely accepta
BILE to every person who is willing to pay
\ on the value Of such property as he
nav own on the first day Of April.
Having had my attention specially direct
ed to our assessment law, lam prepared to
say that 1t is very defective and imperative.
IL demands revision. When the people OF
this State understand this matter, the pres
sure for such revision will be irresistible.
Respectfully, your obedieut servant,
JOIN W. MCCREERY.