The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-11-30
FOR ADDTTTOxAL RETENUE.
Taxation on Corporations Engaged In
Interstate Commerce Advocated.
Editor Of The Times:

| Inter state Commerce Advocated.
| Editor OF The Times
Sir,-To those who have the welfare of
| Virginia most at heart, and have look
ed into her financial condition, the future
! is fraught with deep concern. To such II
| must be apparent that some speedy leg
| islation must be had TO provide for pres
| ent expenditures, and the additional
| $4,000 annual interest on the century
| bonds, which are rapidly maturing, 9TH
erwise the State will soon be unable TO
meet its financial obligations. What
| that means but few are too young to re-
member.
Virginia is an agricultural state and in
| the present condition of affairs, it is i'm
possible to levy on the landowners
| greater rate OF taxation. The farmers
could not and would not submit to II.
Then to what resource can the state
| look for additional revenues? II sug-
| gestions be in order from citizens having
strong convictions in the matter. the
writer would name several resources,
| which. in his opinion, may enable the
| state TO raise ample revenues without in
creasing the rate Of taxation. Fortu-
natey the way has been blazed by the
| Supreme Court of the United States, and
| the path well beaten by other States.
These States have added materially 10
their revenues by levying a just and
equal tax upon the property OF cOmpan-
les engaged in interstate commerce with
In their borders.
Comm encing with the famous Pullman
| Palace Car case, decided in 1891, and end
ing with the Adams Express Company
case. decided I'm 1897. the Supreme Court
Of the United States has held, through
| line Of decisions, argued for the cor
poratior by the foremost counsel in the
country that the individual States could
levy tax on corporations engaged I'm
interstate commerce largely in excess
Of v hat had been levied, and that such
corporations had not been paying their
due proportion Of taxes.
In pursuance Of these decisions. Indiana,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky and other
States have modified their tax laws and
thereby increased their revenues by hun
dreds Of thousands of dolloras.
Before going further let it be said that
the writer has no sympathy with the
senseless prejudice against corporations
which would deny them the justice amt
privileges enjoyed by private enterprises;
but there can be no reason why they
should not bear their just proportions or
the burdens OF taxation, nor can we be-
lieye they will not assent to what is a
just assessment.
But under our present tax laws n large
part OF the property of corporations en-
gagged in interstate commerce is exempt
from taxation. The Supreme Court OF the
United States recognized this fact. which
was one OF the chief grounds of their de-
cisions.
In the famous Adams Express Com
pany case the company had been taxed
on only about 1900, 900 Of property in the
h..
their own showing. the total valuation
was $4,000 900. And its attempt to ex-
empt this extra sl2,OcoO0o Mr. Justice
Brewer characterized as a hollow mock
cry"
AS result Of the decision the State
OF Ohio compelled the company to pay
taxes on 1893 600 instead of $6S.000, its
former valuation. Taking this as an IL
lustration. a statute in Virginia similar
to the Ohio statute would tax their pro-
perty at about $4,000 instead of 500 500
as is now the case.
In the Pittsburg. c.. c. and St. Louis
Railroad case the State Of Indiana COM
PEELED the railroad company to pay taxes
on $50 1864 40 instead OF SS.53S O53, and the
tax was sustained by the Supreme Court
OF the United States
In the Western Union Telegraph COM
the company TO pay taxes on g. 297 '652 OF
property, instead OF on $3.50 1875 as the COM
pany claimed.
Taking this as another example. Che
Western Union would pay tax on 81 05O.-
Vv0 OF property instead OF on s2isGO as is
now the case, and so Of many other cor
porations.
In recognition Of the first decision in
this line OF eases, Virginia has passed
faNino
Company, and thereby increased her rev.
enue $3.50. But with these other prece-
dents before us. and upheld by the decis-
ions OF the Supreme Court OF the United
States. surely our present LEGISLATURE
Will alter our methods OF taxing the
other corporations engaged in interstate
commerce, and compel them to pay their
proportion OF taxation. When other
States are exacting such taxation OF
these companies. Virginia's duty to her
self IS 10 do likewise.
No less an oracle OF the law than Mr..
James G. Carter of the New York bar.
said, in his petition for a re-hearing in
the Adams Express Company case, that
he expected the example set by Ohio 10
be followed by the other States. IL the
supreme Court OF the United States
should hold such taxation to be legal. 1t
has been held to be legal, and the pur-
IL
III II will be the means OF suggesting TO
me Legislature the property and neces-
sity OF such taxation as other States
have adopted.
The fact is not overlooked that such
action on the part OF the Legislature
would raise great hue aad cry from
some quarters. that we would hear OF
capital being driven away from Virginia
when II was most TO be desired and in
vited' and that II would be fought by
some In the Legislature TO the bitter end:
but II Is right and proper. and the duty
or virginia to herself and her oppressed |
people demands such taxation.
n glance al the present rate OF taxation |
oil the railroads and canals NAV not be |
out OF place. For the year ending Sep |
TENDER 3d. 1891. the total assessed values /
OF the railroads and canals was. In round |
numbers. $50. 200, and the total pro- !: