The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1900-03-11
SUNDAY, MARCH IL. 1900.
cry AND COUNTRY TAXATION.

CITY AND COUNTRY IAAhI1OH. +
II has been whispered that the Commits
sioners of Valuation measure is aimed es-
nec,aaly at the cities. but if any man will
.a1,e the trouble to examine the Auditors
report for the last fiscal year ne VIII
come to the conclusion that the cities are
at least bearing their share OF the puohc
burden.
There are one hundred counties in the
State and eighteen cities, the latter in
Guiding such places as the Virginia hal1
of Bristol, Buena Vista, Radford. VIII
aiauasburg, Fredericksburg and Wlncnes-
ter. Yet, the cities Of Virginia paid into
1he State treasury taxes on realty
amounting to s47s,62so7, while the coun-
ries paid $7ess,e2s5. $40. Twenty Of the wealth
Test counties in the State paid in real
estate taxes about SsS5, 10000. Deduct this
sum from the entire sum paid on realty
IN the country districts, and It Will ne
seen that eighteen cities paid considera-
s,ly more land tax than eighty counties.
The city of Richmond alone paid on this
account Sis, $4,000, being more than one
sixth of the entire land tax paid 10y the
counties. The city of Richmond and the
county Of Henrico combined paid on the
land tax account $21s, 63300, being nearly
tEo-thirds as much as the entire lano
tax paid by the eighty counties above re-
ferred to. This goes to confirm What we
said In yesterdays paper, that city real
estate Is assessed up to its fun value.
while real estate in the country districts
As; assessed. in many instances, at moro
nominal figure.
but as the law in question has to 90
alone with personal property tax, let US
see how the comparisons Wiz hoio on
that account. The total personal property
tax collected by the State for the past
t,scaa wear amounted to $40. $685. OF this
the counties paid $3.50, 9S2.0S. While the
cities maid sl5o. oso.2S. In other words, the
one hundred counties paid two-thirds OF
all The personal property tax collected,
while the eighteen cities paid one-third.
Richmond city paid on the personal tax
account SEA ,sD6.74. while the county Of
Eenraco paid $1i,4ss52, making total Of
e76. o. Richmond city paid on the per-
sona1 tax account more than one-fourih
OF the entire amount paid by all the
counties In the State. Richmond and
Henrico County combined paid in per-
gonal tax a larger sum than the COM
bined personal tax of the counties Of
Bland, Buchanan, Rockingham. Caroline,
Carroll, Charles City Charlotte. Clarke.
CrIag. Cumberland. Dickinson. Dinwid-
die. Essex, Floyd, Fluvanna. Franklin.
4 Giles, iGloucester, Goochland, Grayson.
Greene, Greensville. Henry. Highland.
James City. King George. King and
Queen, King William, Lancaster. Iunen-
burg, Matthews, Madison. Middlesex. New
Kent, Northampton. Northumberland,
Nattoway, Patrick, Powhatan, Prince
George. Princess Anne, Richmond. Scott,
Spotsylvania. Stafford. Surry. Sussex,
Warren. Warrick, Wise and York.
1t seems TO us that the counties have
little cause for complaint against the
cities on this score.
The counties of the State paid into the
public school fund on account OF real es-
s tate and personal property 56.3o05o; the
cities paid on the same account $751;
1906. Ii is well known that the large
cities pay considerable more into this
fund than they receive from the State
IN the public school superintendent. In
ntaer words, considerable portion OF
tina school tax levied by the State against