Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-04-27
THE CHANGERS VIEW.

A committee of the Pennsylvania State
Grange has published a circular with refer
ence to the pending revenue bill, which
shows that it is much easier to make effect
i've attacks on measures for taxation than to
defend any given bill. The opponents of
the tax bill have turned their attention to
criticisms OF its provisions. This document,
which is evidently the work oil Leonard
Rhone, makes an equally vigorous attack on
the present system.
The plan of this arraignment is to com
pare the figures of taxation on personal and
corporate property as contrasted with real
estate. 1t first quotes the capitalization OF
railroads, canals, telegraphs and teleuhones,
at total of 81 ,S73. 575. 900, adds thereto
the estimate of other personal property at
81. AS, 900. .000, and shows that the tax on
this total of s., 326. .OO0.0 900 amounts to
S4, 094, 900, of which 50, AS, 600 is collected
from corporations. As contrasted with this,
it takes the total valuation of real estate at
81, ,002. 942, 900, and shows total taxation on
it of S34, GIG, 900 by the census of 1880.
1t asserts that the taxation on this class
of property would be much larger now; but
omits to notice that the valuation would
also be considerably increased. A tax of
but s. 473, 600 on 81, S73, 000, 900 Of one class
of property, and one OF S34, ,3l6, 900 on 81 0O2,-
OO0, 600 OF another class is, in the opinion OF
the Graugers, something that requires recti-
ication.
In presenting this contrast the represcn-
tatves of to farmers take advantage of one
thing. That is that the capitalization of
the corporations is heavily Nutered, while
the valuation on real estate is below the
actual worth in nearly equal proportion.
They are perhaps fully justified in taking
advantage of the corporate practice OF SWELL
ing its stock valuation two or three for one;
and there might be some force in PROPOSE
tion to tax the water in corporate capitaliza-
ton as heavily as ii it were an actual in
veStment. Nevertheless, if allowance is
made for the imitation of corporate valua-
ton and the har6-pan appraIsement of real
estatement, The contrast would be much
changed. In place OF making it appear that
real estate is taxed twelve or thirteen times
as heavily as corporations, it would prob
ably turn out that it is taxed about TWO or
two and i half times as much.
The fact that the dispute about taxation
consists of each SIDE attacking the others
measure presents the question as a choice
between evils. No impartial person denies
the vices of the present system; but the ar
gument turns on whether the pending meas
ure will afford an equitable and beneficial
means of taxing personal property, This
raises two minor questions: frst whether 1t
presents reasonable hope that large amounts
of personal property will not De able to es-
cape taxotion; and second, whether the levy
Of taxation on those classes Of personal
property tina: cannot avoid the assessor, will
not be more advantageous TO the enterprise
and growth of the State than the present
system. The experience of other States,
where systems similar to the one proposed
have been in force for long periods, afford
little encouragement on either of these
points.
In the meantime, there is an excellent
field for our single-tax friends to convince
the farmers that this levy of four-ffths of all
the taxes in the State OF real estate is an
ideal state of affairs, only TO be improved
upon by adding the fraction Of tax that does
not come from the land, 10 the total and
making the land owners pay all of it.