The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1893-02-11

LIS PHliCo W PIOpCIuys
ton of real estate in 1.-THE State is, as
whole, upon an assessment falling far
below real value. This is not only true
in Maine, but true everywhere, and true
of all species of property. What trader
in the whole State of Maine is really
taxed for the full value of his average
stock of goods? What lumberman on
any of our rivers was ever assessed 1of
the full value of all logs and lumber IN
his possession? Usually in such cases
proximate estimate, equitable towards
the taxpayer, is intended to be made.
And no one complains of the manner or
result of it that know of.
An argument has been current that 1t
is better to relieve assessors from the
necessity of exercising any discretion IN
the assessment of securities. But is sucn
a result effected, even by the proposed
bill? Are assessors to assess four per
cent bond as highly as six OF seven per
cent, or doubtful bond as much as an
uudoubted one, or must they not exer-
else Judgment and discretion on the sub
iect? And is it not true that the same
thing follows as to all kinds of property?
Not parcel of real estate nor an article
of personal property can be assessed
without the assessors exercising dis
erection in estimating values. And it can
not be overlooked that assessors have al
ways been influenced by equitable con-
iterations in assessing property some
what in proportion to the profits and in
come it produces. Unimproved real es-
tate is taxed less than it would be if rent
were collectible from it.
There will be another inequality,
amounting to injustice, flowing from the
proposed bill. 1t is extremely unsatis-
factory to require a few persons to pay
heavy assessments on class of property
when all persons similarly situated do
not pay proportionally as much. The
few ill bear heavy burden-the many
will contrive to escape the burden.
It is not in~human nature to expect
that men will stan the compulsion of
paying more than half the earnings of
their property for taxes on such prop
erty; as long as such a result is avoid
able. Some men will remove from the
State Money will be invested in real es-
tate within and without the State, and
will add nothing to the bulk of taxable
property. Trusts may be transferred
into other more liberal jurisdictions.
But, above all, there will be tremen-
dous temptation for suppression and con
cealment in the listed returns. Men will
often go great lengths in suppressing the
truth, or in making constructions favor
able to their own interests, to avoid what
they deem oppressive taxation. They
find ways for reconciliation of the con-
science.
Dean Swift more than century ago
described revenue laws that were often
sive to those affected by them as scob-
webs that will catch small flies but allow
wasps and hornets to break through"
Another tendency such strict law will
have, and that is, to induce persons TO
attempt to obtain higher than the safe
current rate of interest on money by en-
barking in the numerous unreliable and
speculative investments which fare now,
on account of the .seheapness of money,
flooding the market, to the injury OF
credulous people.
There would be a different result under
a system such as the amendment pro-
DOSES. The amount reaped for taxes
would probably be greater in the aggre-
gate, and taxpayers would be contented
to pay their taxes. Almost any one
would pay what would seem to him a
reasonable amount of taxation. In the
state of Connecticut the tax is one per
cent for five years, think, and the year
the law was set in operation in the city
of Hartford, the valuation on money and
securities jumped from the sum OF three
to thirty millions. In Pennsylvania,
think, the tax is one-third of one per
cent annually and the law works admira-
bly there. So would it work well here
under any fair and reasonable system.
Men would not conceal their money by
Investment abroad, and there would be
more money to be let at home. 1t would
be better for both lenders and borrowers
athome. Severe taxation locks up money,
while reasonable taxation brings it out.
A question may arise whetherth this pro-
ject would be legally sustainable, IN view
of the constitutional provision that taxes
on real and personal estate are to be as
sessed equally according to the value OF
the property. 1t would seem that, II
property can be doubly taxed for failure
to expose it to the assessors, reduction
might, on the same principle, be made
for exposing it to them. That clause in
the constitution has been frequently very
literally construed by the courts, and
necessarily so. Otherwise there could
be no exemption from taxation. Rail
roads could not be taxed in the mode
thew are now taxed, nor would savings
bank depositors stand, as they do, on
favored ground, and other instances
could be abduced.
In Connecticut, bonds and notes pro-
duced for taxation are to be registered,
and without registration they are not
legally transferable or collectible in that
state, and the tax is paid for the registra
ton. Unregistered bonds are there to
be fully assessed, if discovered. So here
the tax could be assessed for registra-
ton or license.
[ am not advocating the law prop 7sed
by the commissioners, even though shorn
Of some of it's severity by some such an
amendment as is here proposed. think
the present law well enough. Assessors
know pretty well where to apply the
pressure, and have great power to do SO.
But if the listing system is to come, let
it be made as free of harshness as 1t
reasonably can be.
The bill of the commissioners seems
to discriminate in favor of the "hornets
and wasps,'' in that it authorizes dou-
BILE taxation of all ones property, real
and personal, for neglect to hand in a
list This would bear heavily upon
many taxpayers, but would not SO Sc
verely affect one whose possessions are
all or principally securities. Double
- nf