The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-12-22
METHODS or Tti.fTTOS.
The Legislative Committee Hears the Views
OF Mr.. Coleman nnd Mr.. Shenrmnn.


Tho State Legislatures joint Committee on
Taxation. sitting in the room OF Part H. Of tho
Superior Court resumed its hearing OF wit
nesses yesterday. Senator McClellanl pre-
sided. The first witness was George s. Colo-
man. In answer to questions by Thomas j.
Dreamer OF counsel to the committee. ho said
that from October. 1885. to June 1882. hs was
connected with the Corporation Counsers
Office. and had charge there OF all matters
relating to taxation. In 1886 there was bill
before the Legislature which tool; AWAY from
the city the power to tax the capital stock OF
fire and marine insurance companies doing
business here. This bill was submitted to the
witness. and lie pointed out the effect it would
have. But i: was passed. and the city lost over
$4,000 wear.
To another question BY Mr.. Dreamer the
witness said the Court Of Appeals had held
That Join. stock companies formed by mutual
agreement; were no: corporations In the sense
that they were subject to taxation. This de-
cision had freed at least $40. 100000 OF capital
from taxation.
Questioned about the taxation Of tsleera ph
companies. the witness said that they were
taxed only ON their rIaut. their poles. and
wires. He thought they should be taxed on
their gross receipts Tho witness referred to
the fact that many wealthy persons having
what was called the taxpayers paradise.
claimed their suburban homes as their resi-
dence for the purpose Of reducing ia RATION.
he witness WAS questioned as to how share
holders in large corporations escaped taxa-
uon on their shares ty tho payment by the
caTroIn hs o. tay en- small Imonns o.
Company was cited. whose capital il SlJ.uOO.-
900 or s2o.oonooo and which pay, taxes
ns.s said he believed the >, Cordase Company
was no Irnvis ION. as Tar rs he knew. for tn.
capital OF the ind vi.usl corporations OF which
In answer 70 senator NIcCleilan,. the witness.
said he was in favor Of abo!ishipg the State
tax on lsnd and taxing. not the capital. but
the revenues OF corporations. He was slso in
favor Of an income tax in the case Of indi-
The next witness was Thomas G. Shearmnn.
He said that inefficient taxation OF personal
nrorertv invited capital into n state. while
having, over Slnoooo capisai sought a place
where h" could invest it 50 no would have tho
on mortgages was abolished. and the result
was largely Increased investment Of capital
~ mort Ga Ges there anu reduction OF INTEREST
stock Of corporations TIE stock actually or os-
ten>ibly took flight from the state. lie did not
thimE an moore tax was suitable for this
country. II might answer in Turkey or Tar
tary. but not here. 1t was impossible. he
thought. efficiently TO collect a tax on personal
PROPERTY. He was i'll favor OF putting all taxes
ON real estate.
The examination finally drifted into an mr.
Gument between Lawyer treamer and Wit
Mr.. Creamer acknowledged that he was not
familiar. with the singletax theory. He finally
reiaps5si into ,t silence while Mr. shearmaney;
was misunderstood by tho farmers Under il
the farmer would not DO taxed more than ST
the rate Of $1,000 an acre would be IMPOSED Has
The committee will sit to-day at > 4. N.