New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1905-06-06
rp. NcHJsE TAX DEDUCTIONS.

c,,+,o,,ar C,rout is right in thinking
49, +ba question remaining in dispute CON-
d., +ba franchise tax should De see'ieu -
lon, Irrigation so far as the acci ueu ,---a,-
| ne DDtso,a5 No compromise Should howeNei'
10 agreed upon which makes any pre1eue -De,isa
,,+,,re concession. The scope Oh INC -
roy law and the nature OF the pay iiie,'s
to made are questions Tor Juuiotdi St4Ia,,,nrt
-. ~ ord ore far too important Tor seltieuieH.
ILL., friondIv agreement between taxpayers
eso,.IS naturally DESTROYS OF securing LII
So. navmeut of taxes and posslpiy ioi &C.
r. ultimate effect of what appear at uie
moment minor sacr1hces. oor,ora-
80 Troncbise Tax bill provided that corpora
.ione should be credited on their lrancAi9e
Hills with such payments as they were a.. a.. 49,
r,oL,nq ON the franchises when were 40 ~
rat,re of a tax" That was meant " Wv rr1o
assih1o Injustice through double taxauoh- Ane
generations now want the ien'"iI aaca,tos
IT. for the use of the streets TO De accep'.o
paSiH p mon the value of that privilege AS
90 &c 49, most mart the amounts which under liils
.an+,on would be deducted from ae@t ue
200 are comparatively small IL may NC -.
-. in,rnediate adjustment Is good pohct.
certainly nobody should entertain tne NC
ouoyinp a precedent TO be maze WHICH W.
ahlish II as a principle that rehls anu 49,
=, franchises were the same thlng- ouch SoI
ooseion would be a fatal stroke at 'ue w.
movement to make a great variety u
bile but rich properties bear the ian So nsaor,od
tbe pubIic burden which they ha'e
5no In inst such confused notions
~ Court of Appeals years ago declared Ihat
x-.,ob,sss were not taxable under the Ia" aS
:. GOOD snd they remained exempt uhli lto
crescent act was passed, In 1899 III the pay n'ei,.'
For which credit is now asked had peeh cona, so,
erad taxes on the franchises, "ouiu Ho'
generations In those years OF taA eAe'hPI 80
cbises have objected to them! lhey "ei
Iii raoopnized as the rents or purchase prizes
maid for tax exempt franchises men .n'
franchise tax was upheld by the Couil VI Ap
meals Judge Vann, in his opinion nlscusseu o.
length the nature of these payments anu W
,nissad the plea of double taxation. The unlteu
C+o+oS S,,nreme Court in dismissfng the ap-
oooI also gives attention to this plea anu,
toItng cosnizance of the claim that some Vi
those payments have even in law beeh caiieu
IA es. such as car taxes, says:
1r7a o-a mt disposed to undervalue the Iorce
NJ these situations but it would be giving ene
Undue significance to hold that they are po. ~ -
70 displace the power Of the state 70 az IT,,
tba b,,rdens Of taxation property wltnlh lls 80
its The word tax is not infreQuenty uso $50 -,
general sense as denoting a puroeh Va &c .,
en5 not in a strict legal sense OF cha1Se ~ y.
anu tot ;osed NV the state for the purpose o.
revenue for its support
Some iudges have held that certain payments
ought TO be deducted from he 1raheni'e -
and other Judges that those same pay nien'
ouoht not to be- Certainly, with such aulLoi ~
/ oS the Court of Appeals and the United State'
SUPREME Court Cor the view that they are
General at least, only rental charges, ana no
properly taxes. he would be rash and waste. oad
Guardian of public interests who should conceo
for the future any credit for them on the Ia
hills or make any compromise which did no
distinctly stipulate against any argument
conclusion being based on the compromise o
nending accounts The principle is one 10 D
reserved for the decision of the court OIL Ap
| meals