Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-05-03
The Board of Assessors Positively
Refuses to Exempt A. Quicken.
heimer & Bros.
DECIDING AN IMPORTANT CASE,
Affecting Pittsbnrg Companies That Have
Manufactures Outside of the
City Limits.
TWO PRIVATE SCHOOLS ALSO REFUSED.
People Who Offset to the Public Schools Must Ply
for Otter Privileges.


some very kBotty problems. Getting up
new assessment in such city as Pittsburg
is never an easy task This year the board
has had an exceptionally large number of
perplexing questions with which to wrestle.
The large number of exempted properties
belonging to various public and charitable
institutions makes the work much harder
than it would be otherwise. The fact that
some properties are exempted by law gives
/ rise to a great many claims for like privi-.
leges on the part of others somewhat SIM
ilarly situated. For the past few days the
Office has been thronged with people inter-
| ested in one way or another in the assess
ment, and two or three clerks are kept busy
answering queries.
CITY Attorney Moreland was called in
Yesterday to consult with the Assessors on
close legal point arising out of a protest
against assessment. A. Guckcnheimer q
Bros, distillers have an Office at No. 50
First avenue. They object to being taxed
on the amount Of business done. taking the
ground that their distilleries are located in
Armstrong and Butler counties. They
claim that all their goods are transferred to
buclI CuslOmcIo OutoluC VI tho wy NAN
therefore these contracts are not liable to
business tax.
Citing a Similar Case.
To back up this claim they cite the case
of the Hartman Steel Company VS. the city
of Plttsburg. The company's works were at
Beaver Falls. The business done in the
branch Office in Pittsburg was included in
the assessment of 1888. The company took
| the stand that this was wrong, inasmuch as
| only the contracts were made here, while
the real transfer of goods was made at
Beaver Falls. The Court took this view of
the case and decided against the city. In
his opinion Judge Slagle said:
''The tax complained of in said bill upon
that class of sales, in which the contracts
were made in the city of Pittsburg, and
the goods delivered from the manufactory at
Beaver Fall to the purchasers on the cars at
Beaver Falls, consigned to Pittsburg, is
illegal and void"
The Guckenheimer firm makes the claim
that theirs is a similar case, and strongly
objects to paying the tax. When the ques-
decided to get the views of the City Attorney
before making unal decision.
Too Serious Matter to Trifie With.
Members of the board felt that the ques-
tion was a very serious one To allow the
claim in the case of one firm would necessi-
tate similar action in others, resulting final
ly in considerable decrease in revenue
which the board believes rightfully be-
longs to the city. 1t was held that firms
II. H.
major portion of their business in the city
are practically Pittsburg firms. They are
deriving benefit from the municipality and
should be subject to tax just the same as
those who manufacture their product here.
To allow them exemption from business tax
the board considered an injustice to other
taxpayers.
After some consultation the final decision
of the board was that, since it is necessary
for the Guckenheimer firm to take out a
wholesale liquor license to transact business
in Pittsburg, it is equally necessary that
that they pay tax on that business. At |
torney Moreland agreed with the board that
this view of the situation was correct, and
it was decided to re use the claim.
When the case of the Hartman Steel CON- |
pany was decided it was thought by many |
that it should have been carried |
to the Supreme Court. There was
some dissatisfaction expressed about the |
decision of the lower court. The decision |
OF the board yesterday may lead to more |
litigation on the question. In which event |
it will doubtless be carried to the higher |
court. The Guckenheimer firm is expected |
to take further steps in the matter, though |
1t is not positively known that it will do so. |
The question is one of importance to the |
city, and its outcome will be watched with |
interest.
Averse to Granting Exemption.
Several other matters came up for the con- |
sideration of the board yesterday. Among |
these were the claims of the Pennsylvania |
Female College and the Shadyside Academy |
for exemption from taxation. The board, |
however; is averse to granting tie claims. |
Both the institutions are private concerns
and do not come under the list of exempted |
schools. The fact that they are not money
making establishments was urged in favor
of the claim. The board decided that while |
they might not be making money, they were
beneftting only certain number of
people, making material difference be.
tween them snd regular public institutions.
Public schools are exempt from taxation
and the members or the board feel that peo.
pie who want anything outside of the regu-
lar public places of learning should
pay Tor it, just as they would for any other
other privilege Inls was the nnat decision
on the matter and other claims will receive
similar consideration. The board is in
clined to stick closely to the line, and will
not swerve from it. Numerous other claims
were considered yesterday, but the board is
averse to granting them.
Chief Assessor Case reports that the work
of making the assessment is progressing
nicely. and unless something unforeseen
should turn up they will get through in
good time.