The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1909-03-20
EXCESS TAX, DIRECT TAX, OR
 BOND ISSUE? Conflict Probable Over Means ot Increasing Revenue
 of State. Corbin's Method Would Rest Mainly on Manufactur-
 ing Property,
Direct Tax Would Fall upon Farms and Dwellings-Bond : Issue Would Create Great Interest Charges-Taxes up on Inheritances May be Taken by Federal Govern ment.
(By Our Staff Correspondent.)

1ment.
 (By Our Staff Correspondent)
 Hartford, March. 2O.-The founders of che Commonwealth left the countries of the old world to escape religious perse- cut1on and unjust taxation. They fought the revolutionary war over a question of taxation. Religious per- secutions have ceased. But taxation remains to plague the state. Indica- tions are not lacking that a contest over means of raising revenue to meet the increasing expenses of conducting the government is about to be pre- cipitated- This will be a war in which noSpowder will be burned. But there will<be, dead and wounded in the sense that official careers will be terminated galore. old leaders displaced and new leaders enthroned before the struggle is over.
 The state must raise more revenue, but how shall it do it? Three means are proposed.
 First comes a bonding bill. which carries with it the imposition of sinking fund and the addition of great amounts in fixed charges to meet in terest.
 Second is the proposal to lay a state tax. making a direct asses sment of one-half of one mill upon the grand lists of the towns.
 Third is the plan to increase the in- heritance tax and to increase the tax on misunderstanding establishments, un- der Commissioner Corbin's corporate excess bill.
 The finance committee is getting ready to report state tax measure, which the Senate is probably will ing to adopt. But it may not meet with as favorable a reception in the House
 The Senate. small and compactiy united body, represents to a very large extent the manufacturing bus ness of Connecticut. The House, on the other hard, represents the farmers and the spnailerk class of property owners.
 A state tax, being levied upon the grand list of the towns, hits the small property owner in an unequal degree. And this argument will be used in favor of the Corporate excess bill. The argument made by the Tax Commis- sioner as a reason why the bill should pass will appeal very strongly to the small property owner in the House. It is that manufacturies are undertaxed. Tn the report that has been made to the House upon this subject MT. Cor bin declares that in some cases manu- factories: are assessed upon less than 25 per cent. of their value. This condf- ton, he declares is substantially true of the eonditien prevailing in every Connecticut city.
 The house owner, and small prop srtied class. however, are listed upon a ncuch higher basis, so that direct tax levied upon the grand lists will reach them to a. greater extent.
 The effect Of such a tax in Bridge port for instance, which is perhaps the chief manufacturing city of Connecti- gut, would be. at the rate of one-haf laill, to require a payment into the state treasury of some $37, 300, half of which would rest upon dwelllnSs, and he balance upon property of all other classes.
 The effect of the corporate excess bill would be against property in it's corporate forms. Using Bridgeport again. as an illustration. because it is the typical manufacturing city, it ap- pears that the taxed va'ue of manu- featuring property is about SIP, 2,000. 900 while the Census value is about $5O,- ,G0, GOO. Under the Corbin method. the difference of &36. .000. 600 which exists be- tween these figures would be reach ed by the corporate excess tax A cor 2orate excess tax of one per cent. would yield in Bridgeport alone $780,
 The inheritance tax is easy to col- lett. and imposes less hardship than any other. But the problem confront lng the state is to prevent the Federal government from Seizing upon this source of revenue.
 It is not unlikely that a bond issue may be finally: -resorted to as the easiest way of offending the smallest nun1bersof. interested persons.
 Following the hearing before the joint committee on finance Thursday afternoon that committee appointed Su0-c0mm1IIc6. OI three CO T6COInInGnQ 8 substitute for the Dormitzer inherit ance tax bill which will be put into shape for a favorable report. The committee is in favor of such 8. tax and the general sentiment of the leg S. ature seems to run the same way. The present inheritance system in this state is quite imperfect, but in recent years it has raised all the way from s2ac, 900 to $450.o0O a year. It is figured that the inheritance tax plan reporte DIV the committee will add to the reve- nue of the state at least $50O,000 a year.
 The fact that the new tariff bill in cludes an inheritance tax aroused con- siderable interest among the leg a. tcrs and in the main the comment was very unfayora ble. Senator Searles hurried his resolution. dec airing the inheritance tax to be peculiarly a state affair and calling upon the Connecti- clft Congressional delegation to take a stSnd for it's exclusive use as a means pfsstate revenue, into the Senate from he judiciary committee and it was urfickly passed and will be taken up SV the House on it's arrival there on Tuesday.
 sIt would be 6. shame" said Senator seerles. s"for the Federal government tos begin the collection of an inherit ar,,es fax for that belongs to the sev- eraI states by the very nature of it. The state throws it's protection about the property during the lifetime of its possessor and looks after his estate after his death. maintain all the ma
 4-