Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-11-21
The Excessive Tax Assessment.

To the Editor of The Evening Star:
A morning paper of the 10th instant reports
Assessor Trimble to have said of the new
assessment: The board had no idea at the
time 1t was engaged on the work of revision
that there would be such a difference In the
times when this installment of taxes became
due, or perhaps things would have been diff
ferent.' In other words, the standard of
taxation is assumed to be what citizens can
be made to pay, and not what is actually
required to maintain an economical govern
ment. Unnecessary taxation is unjust tax
ation,' and unjust taxation, as Senator Hill
has we'll said, lis the essence of tyranny"
The old assessment produced a surplus.
Recent building operations would have large
ly increased the revenue raised under 1t.
The per capita tax was larger than in most
cities, as SHOWN by Official statistics, and the
special assessments for sidewalks, water
mains, &c, which were added to this were
heavy enough to cover the expense of such
improvements at moderate rates.
To correct these abuses in a logical way,
taxation is increased! 1t should have been
materially lowered.
These assessors sent a bill to Mr.. j. II.
Seiffert for taxes on a house on a lot belong
ing to him. There has never been a house
on the lot. / have seen a case where they
evidently did not consider the value of the
property at all, but estimated it just high
enough to produce 800 in taxes. The state
ment that remonstrance would have led to
correction Is delusive. No doubt ii did so in
some cases, but l filed an affidavit some
months ago that would sell a certain house
for less than the assessment without effect.
Of course excessive taxation is backset
to the District. and it is difficult to imagine
a proper motive for 1t. Not only is it I'M
just. but. If l am correctly informed ii is
illegal The law requires that only an
amount estimated from the expenditure of
the previous year can be legally raised. I
should like to see this tested.
L have before me report No 1I6g House
of Representatives. Fifty-second Congress,
first session. submitted by Hon. Tom l..
Johnson of Ohio. 1t deals with taxation in
the District and is permeated with his
single tax theories. This is class legisla-
ton with vengeance TALL taxes to be levied
on land. 1t would punish men for owning
a certain kind of property and that the
kind on which other property rights and the
constitution of civilized society are largely
based.
The proposition resolves itself into a tax
on rents. as Mr.. Johnson we'll shows. He is
a free trader, and must, therefore. know
that the consumer pays tax. The landlord
would add it to the rent, which is already
the hardest expense for the poor to meet
Mr.. Johnson knows few District property
owners who are single takers" and speaks
of them throughout as if they formed
large proportion of local proprietors. This
would seem disinSenuOus in a less enthuSi-
astic man than the Ohio Congressman for
think II very safe to say that not one land
wv neT III Il HutlEetl. mere OF elsewhere, ne
lieves in anything of the kind. ] know many
large and small property owners. no one of
whom favorS it.
AS another specimen of Mr.. Johnson
facts and logic, he values the land (alone)
in the District at s42:SWo.0U page 81 Of his
repOrt. The entire assessed value of land
and improvements in Brooklyn. a city with
four times our population and many times
our business. is only S4SJ t:,j, .16.
1t would be much easier to prove that all
taxes should be levied on corporations such
as the street railways. in which Mr.. John
son Is Interested, and whose profits are larg-
er than those of real estate, than to main
tain his contention.
PAUL WEBSTER EATON.