New-York tribune., 1901-08-10

to the court to have their assessments vacated
because they are unequal and unfair, ana IL
would be denial Of justice to refuse them the
relief they seek.
1t cannot be that an inequality and unfair
ness of like proportion would find no relief in
this city. may the courts presume that no
such abuse could occur here, and therefore that
no remedy is needed Inequalities so extreme
as TO demand correction may easily occur. Inc
same property in the hands Of two trustees may
he twice assessed without anybody discovering
it, if each person can inspect only his own as
sessment and the trustees do not happen TO
compare notes. There are hundred ways in
which injustice may be done if secrecy Is al
lowed and Judge Cullen, of the Court Of Ap-
peals, in his dissenting opinion, rightly said:
The petitioner a taxpayer is interested not
only in the assessment for personal property
"levied on himself but also in those imposed
"on others: for the greater the assessment on
Others the less will be the amount of taxes
which he will he ultimately compelled 10 pay.
Chief Justice Shaw. of Massachusetts-one of
the countrvs great iudges-declared as essential
to n valid tax measure: ITO enable every one
TO know. with reasonable certainty. for what
polls and for what real and personal estate he
rs taxed and for what all those who are liable
with him are taxed.
Against this view of great iurlsts of the neces-
sity Of publicity is set up the opinion of the Tax
Department of this city, expressed in its am
davit opposing the recent application:
From the experience of those who have been
long IN this department we are satisfied that the
nublica tion of the list or the giving any eX-
tended list to individuals is not good pubic
policy, for the reason that 1t is generally abused
and made the means Of backmailing the tax
paying citizens Of the city hy persons not con-
nected with this department.
Probably the commission did not quite mean
its suggestion that blackmailing "by persons
not connected with this department threat
ened a monopoly of that business by persons
connected with T. but it is certainly fact that,
however honest the present practice may be,
concealment of the lists gives greater oppor-
tunlty for favortism and general corruption on
the part of officials than any publication of the
lists could give for blackmailing on the part of
outsiders. This State has always enjoined pub
licity Of taxation. and individual rights still call
for adherence to that principle. If assessments
may be kept secret from all but the assessed
there is no limit 70 intrigue and abuse. Corrupt
bargains may be made. and the power of assess
ment may become q potent political engine or
an instrument of personal ambition. At best
the system of arbitrary guessing at the value
of personal estates, tempered only by the oh
jections Of the taxpayer if he IS hit TOO hard, Is
n bad one. If administered under a blanket il
becomes intolerable. People in other parts Of
the State have the right to inspect personal as
sessments. and il is due 10 the people of this
city that the legislature should as soon as pos
sible give them also this right, so essential to
their protection, which ar present the courts de
clare not TO he theirs.