The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1907-04-12

alton. He sells II to A and takes
| his note. sells II to B and takes
| his note. The horse has probably
| been sold q half dozen times during
the year, notes given each time, and
yet the taxes must be paid upon the
horse and the holders OF each OF the
notes are supposed to return them
| for taxation. Is this fair? Is II
Just? Does It not work n hardship?
MORE COMPARISONS.
An Ohio resident may own a farm
across the line in Pennsylvania. He
does not pay taxes upon II. They are
paid in Pennsylvania. He owns
stock In a Pennsylvania corporation
which has valuable plant adJoin-
ing the farm we speak OF. The cor
poration pays taxes in Pennsylvania,
and yet the holder OF the stock in
Ohio must likewise pay tax upon his
holdings ] may own stock In an
Ohio corporation doing business in
Ohio | am not obliged TO pay. My
neighbor here owns stock in a cor
poration In Pennsylvania and he is
Obliged TO pay. Is this Just?
What should be done? ! speak for
no one save myself. First in my
Judgment the constitution should be
OF the legislature entirely, or TO so
amend Section of Article ~ that II
will permit OF a classification OF the
subjects OF taxation. II Us urged
that II this section OF the constitu-
tion be wiped out entirely, and me
legislature left free TO DO what TO
IL seem mete there would be no end
OF lobbying and corruption.
My answer 10 that proposition is
that | would rather trust to the mer-
cies OF an occasionally corrupt legis-
lature than would trust the present
generation to look into the dim vis-
tas OF the future and determine
what the contingencies OF fifty years
hence may be.
THE REMEDY.
But Il Is not necessary to go 70 that
extent, II the people will but per-
NIT classification OF property so
that real estate may be Lut upon
one footing; tangible personal prop
erty upon another, and intangible
upon still another. then laws may
be passed which would be pertinent
and applicable to each subject. II
is just and entirely practicable 10
require real estate to be returned at
its true value, but fifty-six years of
experience have taught us that II is
not practicable to trust TO the tax
payer TO return his personal property
or his tangible property for taxa
tion. The returns of personal prop
erty In Ohio are about one-half as
much as the real estate. But very
small percentage of the intangible
property is returned II is supposed
II is not, and our officers who have
been entrusted with the administra-
tion OF these laws, either cannot or
will not endorse the returns. Would
II not be fairer then to adopt some
statute taxing personal property. and
particularly intangible personal prop
erty. at lesser rate? Would II not |
be more likely to be returned for tax
alton? And certainly we don't |
want to be put In an attitude where |
we are forcing money and the hold |
ers of securities to move without |
the state. When the rule Is once |
II will apply with equal and |
exact justice to all. because each
will have the same opportunities TO
acquire personal property tanei-
BILE on fntangibla that he now has
10 acqdire real estate. II is not true
hat a rule OF this kind would work
An injustice upon the owners OF real
estate. II is said that The farming
communities pay proportionately
more taxes than the residents OF cit
es. This, believe, is true, but Il is :
no more true of real estate than Il is
1f personality. because statistics win [
show that the pro rata tax upon
in the rural districts Is
also IN sspes Of the pro rata tax
upon the personally In the city ana
Iricts. We are not without an ex-
ample upon this Subject. In the
pity OF Baltimore. prior to 1896, for
Sign securities were taxable at the
'ame rate as ofher property In that