The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1906-02-23
Tables Showing che Total
Tax and Distribution At
Present and Under the
New Rule
SENATOR COLBY PLEASED
HOW THE PERKINS MEASURE
COMPARES WITH THAT HE
PRoPosRD-UsEs TO WHICH
THE NEW REVENUE MAY BE
PUT.
Special to ..The Jersey city Newa.'')

F@ ny 81.
Special to AThe Jersey City News'')
TRENTON, Feb. %. 19O6.-The
unanimous passage of the Perkins rail-
road tax bin in the Assembly Wednesday
evening. with the amendment proposed
by the Record Fagan-Colb faction, was
entirely unexpected. but it seems to give
universal satisfaction to all factions in
terested in equal taxation. except the
railroads. Predictions are freely offered
to-day that the Senate viii take similar
action on the measure, and that Cover
nor Stokes will give it his approval at
an early date.
The railroads object to the Perkins bill
ON the ground that it is most unjust and
viii impose burden on railroad prop
erty out of all proportion TO that ASSESSED
against other classes of property. If
other property was assessed at true value
as the railroad property is. the railroad
Representatives claim they would not OBJ
ject to any feature of the Perkins bill
except the franchise tax.
That an equal tax bill could be passed
by faction was entirely unexpected. 1t
was thought that these men would stand
out against any measure offered by the
administration and fight to the last ditch
for the adoption of the Martin or Arrow
smith bills.
Senator Colby, is we'll pleased at the
passage of the Perkins bill as amended,
has found by carefully prepared analy-
sis that the total revenues under the Per-
kins bill will amount to within $500 of
the revenue that would be derived if
either the Martin or Arrowsmith bills
had been adopted. The amount that will
be derived by the Perkins bill IS calcu-
lated at 81, 99S, POI 81, making a gross
increase over the existing law of So, 1884,
1896 being the difference between the
present one half of one percent and the
average rate.
This is shown by the following table,
which shows the total tax and distribu-
tion under which the present law, what
it will be under the Perkins law and the
condition if the Colby plan had been
adopted:
Tax plan-Present law, total tax, ST.
S64, ,1S9; State use. 1921, ,795; Municipal
use, $942. .394. Perkins law-Total tax,
$4998, POI; State use, $4,055, ,S97; Mu-
nicipal use, s942,S94. Colby Total
tax, $4,99s,S97 State use, $1,s64, ,OGe;
Municipal use. $3.133,205.
The similarity of the method of taxa
tion under the Perkins law and the Rec
ord Fag agan-Colby plan and a comparison
of the result with the present law, based
on existing valuations. is shown by the
following:
Main stem-Total tax, SOC, ,582, ,335;
State use. S497,911: Municipal use, $2,-
19O,S11 Second Total tax, $42,,
$50, ,O97; State use, $942. 1894; Municipal
use, $942, ,S94. PERSONAL---VERY. tax,
So, POI, lis; State use, $12s.005; Munich
pal use, $554. .424. Franchise Total tax,
$59.575,535; State use, 1921, SIT; Munich
pal use, S1.370, ,681.
The only essential point of difference
is that the Perkins laws retains the main
stem tax for the State, adding 81, zoe, 600
to the 81 100000 increase on personal
and franchise tax which the State may
use or apportion to the several munAa'
palities. The latter plan will, of course,
be followed, and it will be used IN the
first instance TO wipe out entirely the
State school tax, which last year amount
ed to 1887, ,710 and for the<current year
will exceed s2,OOO.C0O.
What disposition viii be maae Of the
remaining s1,1Oo,oO0 has not been deter
mined. but it viii probably be utilized
to eliminate some Indirect mode of State
tax now existing, such as the care of the
insane in part by counties. as is the Gus.
tom now. instead Of by the State as a
whole.
Assemblyman Arrowsmith, of Hobo
ken, who made such an energetic fight
in the House for the bill which bears his
name as substitute for the Perkins
bill. is satisfied with the result.