The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-08-10

There is a difference OF opinion existing
between the presidents and cashiers of
national banks and the Providence board
of tax asses sors as TO the duty of the
bank men in furnishing the as SCISSORS
with inside information.
TIE simple question is-are the officers
OF national banks required by law to per-
nit the assessors TO inspect the full lists
of stot kholders, ali OF w hom are, theo-
reticaliy at least, subject to taxation for
their shares as personal property?
Bank men say no, and have refused the
assessors the privilege of such inspec-
tion. The assessors say yes, and propose
to have the question finally settled by
the United States Court.
This is one of the most interesting
features OF the general subject OF taxation,
snd the decision Of the court will con-
rtituto precedent by which the action
of every national bank in Rhode Island
will be determined. And. furthermore,
the case is peculiar TO this State, because
OF a provision in the national bank act OF
Congress by which the manner OF taxing
shares is left to the discretion OF the leg
islaturei OF the several States and as with
the bulk of the legislation of the States
there is no uniformity among them in
this particular case.
The action of the assessors In asking
for the lists at this time is a novel one,
and it is the first time that the request
has been made for nearly 20 years. bank
men explain this by stating that the as
SCISSORS realized they had right under
the laws of the State to make such
demand. The assessors account for the
insction OF tn cir predecessors and them
selves up to the present year on the
grounds OF sentiment.
General Elisha Rhodes OF the board of
assessors was asked why this attempt had
been made TO secure more complete in
formation relative TO personal taxable
property.
He replied, "That is perfectly fair
question, but speaking for my associ-
ates on the board, would rather not
answer IT. No matter what reply 1
might give the public would not under
stand our motive"
The general was then asked why such
action had not been taken before, and
his answer was: "Rhode Island is
small State, and every man knows his
neighbor. There has always been
strong sentiment here against inquiring
too closely into mans affairs. 1he
examine the lists of those who own Ma
tio1sl bank stock, but there IL no law
authorizing us to SEQ the lists of those
who own stock In the American Screw
Company or the Gorham Manufacturing
Company or in any other manufacturing
concern. And for that reason we have
not seen fit TO take advantage OF the one
isolated privilege afforded by statute. IL
we han we would have been taunted no
doubr with being asked why the owner
OF Industrial shares should not also be
ierretcd out"
In support OF this view OF the case
base.d upon the temper OF the people is a
statt3ent in the report of the board OF
htate valustion made to the General AS
sembiy at its january session, 1892. The
statement Is as follows:
sin addition TO uniformity in methods,
which the board have recommended
above, the committee found that the
so-cllled listing system in more or
less inqcisitorisl form, was in operation
in most OF these states; hut upon the
presentation OF the report ofthis commit
tee, the board, after q lengthy discussion
OF The question, concluded that Rhode
Island sentiment would not permit of
the adoption o' listing system with
much more inuuisitorial features than
the present syi m now possesses.
A general feeling. then, against any