Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-12-09
TAXING CHURCH PROPERTY,
Mr. Robertson Opens a Hot Discussion by
Advocating the Assessment of All Real
Estate-Mr. Lambie Comes Back at Him
Both Called to Order.

Mr.. Robertson Opens a Hot Discussion by
Advocating the Assessment of All Real
Estate-Mr. Lambie Comes Back at Him
Both Called to Order.
Select Council enjoyed itself for half an
hour discussing an ordinance exempting
churches. schools, hospitals or public insti-
tutions from the payment of building per-
nit fees on buildings to be used for educa-
tional, charitable or religious purposes
Mr. Robertson took the floor in opposition.
He said the tendency of the best class of
thinking people of the present age is in favor
OF the taxation of church property. Churches
are only corporations, and it is a wrong dis
elimination to exempt them and tax other
corporations. If this keeps on the great
mass of taxation of this country will
fall upon the people who have little or
nothing and the millionaire corporations Of
everv kind and class will be exempted. The
Third ward of this city shows the impro-
priety of this idea. Nearly one-sixth OF the
ward Is covered by church property, free of
taxation. If that property, valuable for
business purposes, as 1t is, was taxed like
contiguous property, as by right it ought
to be- the bulk of it would be yielding
An Honest Revenue to the City,
and il would be on the market for sale
in the over-crowded downtown district.
1t would be far better and more
equitable for the people who own
churches to pay the taxes on them-better
for the people and the city as well. In this
ordinance it was intended to usurp the
powers of the individual taxpayer for the
benefit of the corporation. While this was
true of churches it was equally true of other
corporations, such as those contemplated in
| this ordinance"
MIR. Lambie thought Mr.. Robertson's re-
marks had been entirely out of place, speak,
| ing as he had been, on motion to suspend
the rules to consider the ordinance on two
reading, but since so much had been said,
more would be in order. He thought, in
the first place. that the building permit tax
should be abolished altogether.
ssIt was wrong" Mr.. Lambie continued,
ito tax n man for building house and then
tax him more for his property after the
house was built. 1t would seem more proper
TO hold out inducements for people to build,
the better class of buildings the better for
the city. After the structure was completed
the city would get Its revenue from the in
creased legitimate valuation.
"I believe in having a careful building
inspection, and in allowing no one to build
| without a permit, but l think the salary OF
the inspectors should come from the city,
! and not from the comparatively few citizens
who erected buildings to improve the city, u
Mr.. Lambie cited the case of the Seventh
and Eighth wards, now building a new
school house, and said the directors had
been taxed $50 for building permit. He
failed to see the propriety in that, of the city
paving tax for the erection of her own
A Blot on the City Government.
Mr.. Robertson replied that he was more
than willing to wipe out the building per.
NIT tax altogether. He thought it blot or
the city government, but if it could not be
removed he was opposed to discriminating
against any one class of corporations. Bodies
that were able to build, whether churches OF
not, ought to pay the same as others. He
was opposed to making one class of citizens
pay for the benefits which the whole en-.
joyed.
Mr.. Lambie replied: "That argument
will cut both ways Mr. Robertson, who
poses as the champion OF free bridges had
better not try to use such reasoning, for
with it be attacks his own pet project. Il
it is wrong to legislate for the whole city al