New-York tribune., 1908-06-12
VEIF JERSEY TAX MIDDLE.

The failure of the New Jersey State Board of
Assessors to confirm within the period pre-
scribed by the statutes the valuations of rail
road nropprties in Hudson County which have
been made by one of their members is much
commented upon. and the reasons for it are
subjects of much speculation. The incident is
the more remarkable because the member of the
board who made the uncOnfrmed report of val
uations Mr. Hendr:ckson, is commonly regarded
as exceptionally competent well Informed and
judciOus and his recommendations, therefore,
have weight with the public mind
II is true that the valuations reported by Mr..
HcndrickSOn for 1906 and 1907 are very much
greater than those which were made by the
board. of which he was not then a member,
for 1903. They are almost twice as great al
though the property assessed is practically the
same. with the exception that the riparian part
of it was formerly assessed only to the bulk
head line, while now it is assessed TO the outer
ends Of the piers. One railroad in Jersey City
has its assessment on one part of its property
raised from S567, 40 TO 81, $4,000, and on an
other part from s. 1880 TO S4,S15, ,120. and
the total for all roads in that city Is raised
from S1290S. .59S to So. .227 ,1S2. In Hoboken
| the total assessment made by the state board
for 1903 was 132S 800: that by the city as
SCISSORS for 1907 was $26;}2 900. and that by
Mr. Hendrickson for 1907 is S2.S51.;};j3 In
West New York the valuation Of one railroad
property has been raised from S654,5o0 to So,
171.149
Now it is perfectly evident that either the
1903 assessments We're far too low or those of
1907 are far too high. and it is not easy to
understand how such widely different estimates
of value could be honestly and intelligently
made. 1t is observed. moreover, that the two
members Of the present Board of Assessors who
by their absence from meetings or refusal or
failure to act upon their colleagues report
brought about the existing complications. are
the two who were members Of the board when
that earlier and much lower valuation was
made. The natural assumption of the people is.
therefore. that they We're unwilling to confirm
Mr. Hendricksons assessments because they
garded them rs too high, but whether that view
was inspired hy impartial love of simple
equity by q reluctance To have their own earlier
work thus substantially discredited. or by sym
pathy with the corporations against which the
taxes are to he levied is a question which will
be variOusiy answered.
The board has now been stirred to helated ac-
tivity by the taking of legal action against it,
Rut il may prove too late TO escape some bad
effects of the delay. The failure to confirm the
assessments before this date may. and probably
WILL have the effect of throwing the whole mat
ter into the courts for tedious ADJUDICATION
which will he decidedly embarrassing to any
community which may be in need Of its share Of
the revenue from railroad taxes and which may
thus be kept waiting for another wear with
out any certainty as to the amount which it
will ultimately receive. With its imposing
and costly boards of State Assessors and of
Equalization of Taxation it would certainly
seem that New Jersey ought to keep itself free
from such muddle of affairs