The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-02-26
THE ACTION OF THE HOUSE
TAXING RAILROADS.


heated debate of the session, passed the
revenue bill on its second read
ing including, the tax upon the
gross income of railroads. It
took three DAYS to pass it. but the
discussion convinced every fair-minded
man who was present that some provi
sion ought TO be devised that would re-
quire the railroads of the State TO pay
tax on something like the real value
of their property. There is strongNoppo-
sition to the tax on the gross income
but practical unanimity in favor of
compelling the railroad property to be
listed at a valua ton like other proper
tx in the State is listed. And in this
position the members of the Legislature
are endorsed by thoughtful men every
where. Mr.. Overman's first sentence in
his resolution shows that the sentiment
is general for providing for an increase.
for it declared ''Whereas it is claimed
and generally believed that the railroad
equal proportion of taxation" This be-
ing true, instead of referring the matter
TO the Railroad Commission and leav-
ing it open for long discussion and agi-
tation, what is the objection to the Leg
islature ordering the assessment of the
railroads on the basis of three-fourths
of the sworn value, or on the basis of a
six per cent earning value?
If the objection to the gross income tax
is valid, there can certainly be no rea
sonable objection to requiring an assess
ment upon the same terms and by the
same methods that govern the assess
ment of farms. houses, stores and bank
stock. Nobody is in favor of any tax
alton upon the railroads that discrimi-
mates against them or imposes unneces-
sary burdens. Everybody, except those
who are thinking more about the rail
roads than the State wants to reach Il
solution that will compel railroads to
pay their just share of the expenses of
government.
1t is asked by those who are fighting
the Finance Committee and the Conner
proposition, why do you single out
railroads for taxation?' The answer is
that there is no suggestion of doing this
The legislators. coming to the consider
alton Of questions of taxation, find that
while banks, factories, farms, stores and
everything else is listed for taXation at
three-fourths of its value the railroad
property is listed at slightly more than
one-third of its value. Instead of the
question being the one stated by the OPP
ponents of both plans proposed, the ques-
ton that sincere legislators ask is ''Why
have the tax-assessors Disseminated in
favor of the railroads, permitting their
property to go ON the tax books at
little over one-third of it's value while
all other property is assessed at three
fourths of its value?" In trying to rem
edy the unfair discrimination III favor
of railroads, the. legislators are perform
ing their sworn duty.
The sworn statements of the railroads
in North Carolina put the total cost of
the railroads at S7,974,113. As the big
systems are worth much more than the
&c hoc Of hn tol
value of the railroad property in the
State If Judge Connor's suggestion that
he correct assessment would be a sum
equal to an earning basis of six per cent.
should be adopted, the assess
ment would he 500, $50, $50. If
the assessment was based ON net
profit of 8 per cent the assessment would
be on a valuation of $47,035,537. II
we discard the earning basis and adopt
the plan that prevails in assessing the
property of individuals, the assessment
would be $65,979,S34 instead of $685.
j19, S6S. loan assessment all out Of
proportion to the sworn value of the
property. Is it not the duty of the Leg
stature to declare that the discrimina
ton in favor of exempting much of the
property of railroads shall cease? VIII
not every business man in the State
who pays taxes on an assessment OF
fhreefourths of the value of his prop
erty be glad to see the Legislator,
taking steps to put railroads on the same
basis? Will not those who have no
kept posted be astonished that during
all these years they have been paying
tax on their property at three-fourthS
It's value, while the railroads have es
capped at about one-third Of its sworn
value? We would not advocate and
there is not a Democrat in this Legis
ature who would vote for any system
of taxing railroads which be believed
would be burdensome or oppressive. This
whole agitation and discussion arise,
from the fact that for long years rail
roads have enjoyed an exemption from
just taxation and that exemption has
forced haa yar burdens uOOn all other