The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-12-01
SETH Low PAYS OLD TAXES.
PAYS TO TIE CITY S27,OOO HE
MIGHT HAVE AVOIDED.
Gets New Light on the Meaning OF the Law
Taxing Mortgagcs-LawsOn Purdy
Agrees with Him That the Law IL
U~nfair-New LEGISLATION Talked OF.

Taxing M0rtxhfee fuTuy
Agrees with Him That the Law Is
Unfair-New Hesitation Talked or.
Ex-Mayor Seth Low, having discovered
a few days ago that he had through error
deducted for the years 1901, 1902 and 1908
from the value Of personal estate liable to
taxation the amount Of a mortgage on
property belonging TO him, paid yesterday
the taxes, which he considers Tue to the
city for the three years with interest. Tit
total amounted TO SCI, 1907, and a check was
handed to Comptroller Metz by Edward NJ.
Shepard, Mr.. Lows counsel.
The Comptroller said afterward that Mr..
Low was not legally responsible for the
payment Of the back taxes, but that he had
insisted upon il. Al the same time, Mr..
Low draws attention TO the inequitable
nature of the existing tax system, an opinion
that was agreed with by President Lawson
Purdy Of the Tax Board. Yesterdays in
cident may lead to another effort at the
coming session OF the Legislature TO reform
the methods Of assessments In this city.
The situation in which Mr.. Low found
himself Ia explained in this letter to Mr..
Shepard:
DEAR Mr.. SHEPARD: I have very recently
ascertained that early in 1901 I deducted
from my personal estdUc lhUlc W
a mortgage on property belonging to me.
which l just now learn l was not. under
the statute, entitled to deduct, because
technically the bond secured by the mort
age was not my own bond. l wish. there
fore, to pay to the city now what, as matter
of strict law, should have been paid then.
In November. 1908. ! assumed the MORTGAGE
explicitly. so that since then. as you advise
me, IL has been a debt In a form that l have
been entitled to deduct. In 1909 and 1908
I paid without question all that l was taxed
for, and there il, therefore,. no legal obl-
CATION upon me. either substantial or tech
meal. TO pay any more.
Possibly there is little moral obligation.
either; for, II / had realized the situation then
as ! do now.it would have been natural to DO
then what ! did later. without any thought OF
the result lnvolved-aocept liability for the
mortgage in the form that. under the statute.
would have xempted me from personal
taxation. But those years covered the
term Of my Mayoralty; and while l was Mayor
/ accepted the responsibility OF stating to the
ass essors the sum for which l was liable.
In making up these figures at the time | gave
the city the benefit OF every doubt. and paid
upon a sum considerably in excess OF what
could have been demanded as l understood
my liabilities. But during these years the
mortgage In question. amounting 70 t4OO.OOO'
remained still an indirect obligation which.
as I am now advised. | was not at liberty
TO deduct. 1 wish, therefore. to pay 10 the
city now. although not assessed for IL. the
sum that, according TO the statute. i should
have paid in 1902 and 1908 in excess OF the sum
which / did pay.
The law that constrains me TO such action,
because the mort gage upon my property
did not secure my own bond. seems to me
very negotiable. and I shall be glad II this
incident does something to bring about an
amendment OF the law.
In view OF the fact that in 1901 you per-
mitted me to consult you upon the subject.
I hand you my check to the order OF the
Comptroller for s27. 397. 2s. in accordance
with the statement at foot. and beg you to
transmit IL to the Comptroller. with such
explanation as Is called for. Yours very
truly, SETH Low
So far as Is Known in the Tax Department
there has never been a precedent for the
regard for his public obligation, as Mr..
Shepard described Il, was manifested In
MANY ways by Mr.. Low during his term as
Mayor. He would never use a postage
stamp paid for by the city for a private let
ter, and he made a memorandum of every
personal telephone call he made from the
City Hall and footing up the total at the
end of every month he sent a check for the
amount TO the Comptroller.
President Purdy Of the board comment
ing on the Incident said:
The facts in the case add another and
forceful Illustration to the injustice and the
absurdity OF attempting to tax Intangible
property and OF relying upon assessments
based upon the euesses OF assessors. II. in
this case. Mr.. Low had promised to pay the
debt for which his property was liable. he
would have run no additional risk and could
lawfully have deducted a very large sum from
this taxable property. This indicates one OF
the inherent vices OF the system. A man OF
large wealth can so invest his properly as not
TO be liable for personal taxes. He can also
AFFORD the best legal advice. Men OF COM
paratively mail means. particularly mer-
chants, cannot so easily arrange their in
vestments.a and the amount at stake does not
justify professional counsel.
l hope this instance will do so much TO call
public attention to the bad law, that Mr..
Low may feel repaid for the large sum he
feels compelled to pay the city.