Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-04-17


perses OF the executive. assessment of
taxes. collection Of taxes and auditors
offices In the cities referred to are as fol-
lows.
Assess collec-
Execu- ment Of tion Of
City tive. taxes taxes. Auditor Total
Washing
nee. -. ses.ooe s1,a7s s2s.21s ,lssss sIss. lss
81 sittf ssa. iss ss ssss 1910.
S eaa 4s.4s9 $3.50 1855 1860 iss ess
Buffalo. s4.s11 $1,000 s,7oe 42,e11 i7o.o22
taJ No returns
TN making this comparison the difference
between the ordinary municipality and the
District of Columbia, with Its threefold
character and the threefold function of It's
government must be kept in mind. Yet,
without making allowance for this, the
actual comparison of the expenditures on
account of the Offices mentioned by MI.
Morrell. as shown by the census statistics,
shows that the national capital expends less
rather than more than the cities which ne
mentions and still better showing could
be made for the national capital by tax
ing other cities which have much larger
prorortionate expenditures.
Population and Valuation.
I'm Mr. MorrelPs first formal table he
compares the population and valuation
of seven cities in the United States for
the year 1904" and upon this table ne
makes the following comments:
From this 1t will be seen that the popu-
lation of ST. Louis. Boston. Baltimore, Buff
falo and Pittsburg exceeds the population
OF Washington from 10 TO 105 per cent,
Newark, N. j., being the only city having
less population and valuation than WASH
ington. The assessed valuation OF property
both real and personal in st. Louis Bal
timore. Boston, Buffalo and Pittsburg ex-
coed the valuation in Washington at from
to 400 per cent, the valuation of Newark
11of,, la-e Aba,x thrnn- rfnrs slf IA
Washington.
without showing that better COMPARE
son might have been made 1t can be shown
that his comparison is not valuable by
the mere statement of the fact that he
omits all reference to the real estate hold
ings of the United States government In
the District of Columbia, where 1t owns
mere than half of the city of Washington,
Including the streets and parks and the
reservations and sites for public buildings;
This property is valued on the assessment
books at 1854. 156956. but Is not taxed;
although the contribution of the national
government of one half of the District APP
preparation fund is partly in lieu of what
1. would pay if it We're taxed like the prl-
vate real estate holdings.
Although the census office bulletin does
not take into account the fact that more
than one-half of the real estate OF the
city of Washington belongs to theU mted
States government, it gives much better
compa rison than that of Mr.. Morrell. It's
figures for the assessed valuation of prop
erty in the cities named by Mr.. Morreii
are q follows
Washington. $1,000
st. Louis .,....'..'-.'.''.''-.' 599 40 99e
Boston 1oi aoI e2S
Baltimore. ~ o. Soo
Buffalo. ........-'' .'-'-.''''.''' e9i oJa "a
Pittsburg. ......-...--.'...' OH i-'7''
ut is true that the per capita total as
sessed valuation of Washington u: c. -
given as 1881 49, which covers only the
valuation of private property. and TO make
a complete comparison this amount snouio
be doubled SO that Washington shouid De
credited with a valuation of 81 .56334. winch
would be more than that of any Of the
other cities in the list Of 175 cities except
Boston and Newton, Mass; but even TAX,
ing half loaf as better than no pfeau
for this comparison, Washington, with an
assessed valuation of S7S1.62. is higher than
st. Louis which has per capita total as
sessed aluation of only SI24.92 ana buiiaio.
sese 81 While Pittsburg has 1882 90 Balti-
more 1925 SO: Newark, N. j.. S636.23 wnile
Boston, the highest city in the country IN
this list has a per capital total assessed
aluation of S2,oo4.oo
Gross Expenditures.
Mr. Morrell well says that gross e4-
penditures are an unsafe basis for criucal
comparison The District Of Columbia
having for filtration plant sewage-disposaI
system railway terminal, District govern
ment building, and other extraordinary I'M
movements can not be 1alriy coHipdi to
with cities which have relatively less ex-
tensive projects on hand. Moreover ma
tionaI capital making, absolutely required
of the people of-the District by their situa-
tion. Is necessarily more expensive thaI
would be the work of a similar number OF
people elsewhere.
But the fundamental reason why gross
expenditures in this particular case are an
unsafe basis for critical comparison Is thaf
under the head of gross expenditures
washington is properly credited with ex-
penditures which. in the other cities, are
made by state or county.
1.-The insurance department Is every
where. except in the District. supported
entirely by the state. Other functions per-
formed by state or county officers are mere
performed by the officers of the District or
Columbia. In respect to schools, contribu-
lions are usually made by the state or the
county, If it be only to the extent OF giving
the normal-school training for teachers,
while In a number of cities there Is state
or county aid for city schools Again, the
charities and correctional institutions in
Guiding prisons and reformato1es, are here
carried entirely by the District OF Column
bia. whereas, in the cities generally they
are carried chiefly, and often entirely. by
the state or county. The mere statement
of these well-known facts shows the use
lessness of comparisons which omit them
Mr. Macfarland then takes up in detail
the various District departments. showing
that the figures given by Mr.. MorreH an
forded an unfair basis of comparison