New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-03-27
CORPORATIONS REBATES.
MP ROBERTS TELLS HOW HIS PREDE
CESSORS MADE THEM.

CONFLICTING COURT DECISIONS SEEM TO HAVE
EMBARRASSED MR. CAMPBELL. TIE
STATES BOND INVESTMENTS
Albany. March Estate Controller ROBERTS TO-
day gave out the following:
az var,ous times since my election statements
have been made to me rejecting on the honesty OF
MANAGEMENT OF the Corporation Tax bureau III the
Controllers Office. These statements came from
so many and such reliable sources that fet
could do no less than cause an investigation 10 oe
made OF the affairs OF that bureau. Al this
,uncture Mr. Dewan. OF Troy. a former clerk IN
the office under Controller Wemple. was RECON-
mended TO me from an influential quarter anu nc
made the claim that If given an opportunity lie
could show undoubed irregularities In the Corpora-
ton Tax accounts. | therefore placed MN ana one
OF nv clerks at work. He completed his investga-
,ion IN my office three weeks ago to-day and re-
turned TO his home at Troy TO write up MS report
as he stated Since then ! have seen hothihs VI
him or his report. In the mean time nave III my
own way made a careful examination ana as VI re-
suit find that there have been RELATED on various
grounds alleged. to transportation companies Oh
,axes Actually paid by them into the State Treas
urv NCAOOOO. OF this amount &@s2' 10 was re-
bated by Mr. Chaplin 81, l0S2'5 u b. MI WeihP'e anu
sl32 4s5 % by Mr. Campbell.
1T is probably fair TO say that seven-eigh'hS VI
these rebates or refunds were made on the grouhd
that the Interstate commerce business e" DUST
ress bednning I'm this State and ending In another
or beginning in another State and ending IN inns
State or beginning and ending IN other H'a'eS' u'
passing through this State-was not taNaple' nv
lou In terms leves n tax on this business. but the
case Of the Philadelphia and Southern steamship
Company W.. Pennsylvania. l22. tniteh states 'Io
ord others somewhat similar to this, decided by
the United States Supreme Court were thouEh' W
Controller Chaplin and later by Controllers "e'"P'e
and Campbell to decide that our statute 50 lar az
{, levied n tax on Interstate commerce business
Of 10
Constitution lodging in Congress the sole power ~
roo,,lot. commerce between the States. After lsS'
M ,ax on Interstate business was levied OF COZ
lected and over 81 10000 OF taxes leVieu anu Pi'r
on that business prior to mat year "cie '
or refunded to the corporations paying the same.
"pu, since the decision by the United states Su-
o,,o cour, IN the case OF the State OF Maine
against the Grand Trunk Railway COMPANY re-
rorted li2 United States, III. ana IN IL n"'''' VI
other cases 20 the same effect there can Nv ~
doub, that our law to interstate commerce j.
constitutional legal and valid. the court hoid'hs
thu, the tax Is not interstate commerce. pu' ~
~, IN. nrlvileg. of exercising corporate powers III
tho State and as Is affirmed in one case no ih''er
method OF determining the amount Oh YIN " "
,,o,d could be devised than by proportoh'ns i" W.
the amount OF business done. f'N-"''o'"''
rosendole holds this view and has written "a" eN-
-. c,r,o, On the subject. and believe that
,h cam. views are held by Attorney-Generai HAN
cock. . -, r.b,,e resting upon other
-faa
and much more slender theories man me
theory which In process Oh ~ Inc IN:
49, e., ,he office is not yet completed, am iot
n,-ad :" EXPRESS any opinion with reference 10
,hese II ~ only fair 10 my predgcesSo, c,,s On
GnmnheIl TO say that after the United SOS
irene Court had decided the case OF the o'rrT S,n
G,inc against the Grand Trunk Railway III w., 49,
r. seemed 10 held that the TAX upon ' mo,n,i,,,
Stat, commerce business was legal anu e Iis.
i"r,l he Instituted proceedings for the col1c ,t
~ IN. tax upon that business. anu ny 'p, r,,'
with the attorneys for the l"iulhH r,ught
,trns in this state a test case was prouEn' WI
E .n, ,niicr against the Dunkirk. Allegheny anu
i,,,t shnrr Railroad Company. The case was " ~
10 the General Term ana IL was u'o,u I ,h ' ,o~ n
Iou t on a An appcal has been taken from this de-
| cIsion and the case IS now before '"e Oo''' -
| Appcals FOR final adjudication. ,,,,.. s,o,s
|rpp,fr',ier Robrrts also made the following STATE
rnent this afternoon regarding the Investment ~
| the state In bonds: -. .o,o and cerks
Ia JIM Tho bonds In charge inform me that an the
hards sold by the State during the administration
| OF Controller Campbell were 500 ,hrT ta p NIX
OF Manhattan Company OF New 0rK S''u a., 'nrede
Trask a 90. II has been the poIicy ot M ny IN.
n.saora for a number OF years past 10 invest .n ne
$500 trust funds I'm bonds Of municipalities wlth
the state Issued for public improvement, ~
bonds were taken during me anhi,., , hsio and
Controller Chaplin on ana S'2 per oSi. ~" Ivs,nn.
J during the administration Of Controllers "e'nPo
! and Campbell on n 3is per cent basis. H.. Comm
MANY of the bonds sold during COntroIer Nai"P,
,o,i's COMMUNICATION were drawing n less rate o,
interest than the bonds purchased anu W.. ~,
at premium in most eas@ me Ps,'ed we're sub
,i,,ad ,n the Attorney General AZ | am informed
before the purchases were made anu CT M
,h,t ali the requirements Of law had beeh cohlplieu
with by the city. village or town issulnE Wy ~ -,
There has never been any default enr, ~ nI haid
ment of principal or interest upon any u d ne'a
| hv tho state The bonds have been purchaser on .
a. per cent basis without any COMMISSIONS UT
brokerage reducing this basis.