The daily morning journal and courier., 1901-03-20
some Statements and Arguments Dealt
 With by MT. Rowe.

To the Editor of the Journal and Courier:
 It is amazing that a measure care
 fully prepared by the Chamber of
 Commerce, for the sole purpose of doing good to, all concerned, should be made
 an excuse for abuse of it's advocates;
 still more, that It's opponents should deliberately falsify alters of public record, as well as misrepresent the bill of the Chamber of Commerce and the
 motives of its advocates. Some are so constituted as to be unable to realize
 that there are men who work for the
 public welfare without considering
 their own selfish advantage.
 In Tuesday mornings Courier MT. Trueman publishes the following state
 ment, which, he says, he has been to
 some pains to secure.'
 Exhibit A. 409 Edgewood avenue, w. Trueman, owner, land $1,750, im- provements S3,7S0. total s'i,530. Owners
 valuation s5,7OO."
 | have secured from the assessors of- flee the following certified copy:
 List of William Trueman, 4O9 Edge
 wood avenue assessors valuation, land $200O house s3,7S0 assessors total vau- ation $5,7S0, owners valuation, blank"
 T hereby certify that the foregoing is true copy of the list now on record in the office of the Board of Assessors of the town of New Haven. Theodore H. Macdonald, Chief Clerk"
 Mir Truemans statement shows that he valued his property at more than the assessors did The records show |, L. I |. have taken the pains to hunt down this had not MT. Trueman made what he calls another exhibit" as follows:
 Exhibit B. 490 Orange street. Henry c. Rowe, owner land $9,375, improve ments $1O,s0O, total 19455, owners val uation $14,O0O"
 The official list, of which I have a copy from MT. Macdonald, certified in the same form as above, shows that the owner did not carry out a valuation, except upon the house. His valuation upon the house, together with the as- sessment on the land and barn made his valuation $16 455, which is just $455 more than I paid for the place eight years ago.
 MT. Trueman adds, Tt would seem ludl D. D SiE6tSSIuGutS dIG ldI llcdIcI right than his sworn statement" How | false and abusive this is may be seen | when 1t is realized that my valuation ! was $455 more than I paid for the place eight years ago, and the assessors was $3,455 more than I paid l for the place.
 I have looked in vain through both ] of MT. Trueman's communications for one line of argument, or one fact bear ing against the Chamber of Commerce bill. On analysis his communications are found to be an attempt to create prejudice and by innuendo and insinua- ton to impress the illogical portion of his readers by associating the idea of hypocrisy with what he terms dig nified, respectable and religious" If 1e will read the able arguments of Pro- lessor Farnam and General Bradley he nay begin to understand the difference between argument and abuse.
 I regret to spend so much space on dr. TIuenan, but in his eomMuniea- ion he not only attacked me person. lily, but demanded my attention. Now l few words about the bill: : Four months ago the Chamber of ( Commerce bill to prevent excessive aS- essments of real estate had but one ( .dvocate and no other adherents. Now 1 t has thousands, because thousands < understand it partly or wholly. Thou andS more would understand and ap- 'rove it but for the violent and mis- z aading attacks of two single tax men, tho believe that all the burden of tax [ tion should be borne by real estate
 Single tax men naturally oppose the < ill, which will reduce assessments on