Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1894-01-11
LETTER FROM RICHMOND.
Correspondence Alexandria Gazette.l
RICHMOND, Va, Jan. 10, 1894.

Correspondence Alexandria GaZtttc.
RICHMOND, Va, Jan. 10, 1894.
Some time ago the various banking
institutions of the State held a conven-
ton in Richmond to organize some
plan for the protection and betterment
of the business. Delegates from all
over the old Commonwealth came here
and after a days session of pleasure
and work adopted set of resolutions
that were intended for mutual benefit.
Recently officers of the building and
loan associations of the State have
been discussing the propriety of hold.
ing similar convention. 1t is alleged
that the laws on the subject are vague
and uncertain and that the matter of
tavation is one of mammoth conse-
quence. The promoters of these en-
terprises claim that the business is as
legitimate as any other and that they
have right to expect the protection Of
the law.
Now that the legislature is in ses-
sion, the matter of a convention or con-
ference has been strongly advocated.
1t is the object of those interested to
adopt bill that will be favorably act
ed upon by the legislature and have
the matter at once and forever settled.
The auditor has ruled that these asso-
Citations are liable to taxation and the
attorney general says it is legal that
they should be taxed.
In consequence of all these things
Mayor J. Taylor Ellyson, president of
the Old Dominion Building and Loan
Association, called meeting to be held
in Richmond January 10th. When the
conference was called to order this
morning by Mr.. ElIyson it was found
that fully hundred representative
business men were present from vari-
Gus sections of the State. There were
delegates from Alexandria, Roanoke,
Staunton, Charlottesville, Danville, Pc
tersburg, Portsmouth, Norfolk, Berkely
Newport News and Richmond. Prom
inent among those present was Mr..
Leonard Marbury, of Alexandria, rep
resenting numbers /, ,, 3, 4, and . of
the Mechanics Building Association of
Alexandria, The Mercantile Railway
Building and Loan Association and the
Mt. Vernon Cooperative Building As
ISOLATION, No. ,, of Alexandria. Mr..
Ellyson was chosen chairman and Mr..
A. l.. Payne, of Roanoke, secretary.
NIessrs. c. A. McHugh, George Per-
kins, VIM. Patrick, Leonard Marbury:
John W. Happier, T. NJ. Hiltzheimer,
and S. H. Pulliam were appointed q
committee to prepare bill setting forth
the object of the meeting.
Al 1 o'clock the convention was again
called to order by chairman Ellyson,
aud the committee submitted its report
in the form oftwo bills, to be amended
and approved by the representatives
assembled, and to be then laid before
the legislature for passage. The con-
vention spent nearly four hours consid-
ering and making slight changes to the
measures proposed by its committee.
The principal fights were upon clause
in the one bill barring the plea of usu-
~, and upon section in the other con-
fining the taxation to companies doing
business upon a purely mutual basis,
and in only the city where organized to,
the sum Of so. There was a great deal
Of discussion as to what companies could
be considered mutual" but those who
considered themselves of that class out
numbered the others and carried their
point.
In conversation with some of the del
gates 1 learned that the Virginia build
ing associations under existing laws are
the subject of discrimination which
seems to be unjust. Nonresident or
foreign companies doing business in
Virginia, having no capital or other
property in this State, pay no property
tax of any kind, and no license tax can
be imposed upon them because there is
no law authorizing the imposition OF
such tax upon any building fund com
pany. A law imposing a special Ii
cense tax upon foreign companies
would be unconstitutional because OF
its discrimination against the citizens OF
other States, unless it imposed SINH
lar tax upon the Virginia companies,
and the passage of such law would
subject the latter class of companies to
injustice because they would have to
pay q property ldA iiOu nAiOA WY iOi
eign companies are exempt. And the
difficulty surrounding the matter is in-
creased by the apparent impossibility
of laying a property tax upon our own
companies, which will not be obnoxious
to the objection of double taxation. If
the capital of building company were
paid up, fixed capital like the capital of
banks and other private corporations,
there would be little difficulty and no
injustice in taxing it as other capital is
taxed. But building fund capital is in
substance and in fact loan to the COM
pany by the stakeholder which he may
have returned at his pleasure, and on
which he pays tax, and to tax it again
as the property of the company is to
impose another and double tax, un-
less it be the usual tax on deposits,
which is very much less than the prop
erty tax. The view entertained by
most of the well informed representa-
tives seems to be in favor of specific
license tax upon all companies doing
business in the State, and the usual tax
on the average deposits.
JOHN L. SULLIVAN KNOCKED OUT
John L. Sullivan has been knocked out
again. This time it is not rival pugil-
ist. His wife did the lob. It occurred