Daily Arizona silver belt., 1909-10-24

becomes his sole estate independent from franchise, capital stock and other proper ty, and is, therefore, subject to tax ation independent of the other three. i It is then easy, gentlemen, to perceive that the unrestrained power to tax is | beyond question power to destroy. It may be maintained or upheld, as we will see later on.
 Now, in order for the several states land territories to tax national banks, all other moneyed capital in competition with national banks must be assessed under the same law and controlled by the same system. Therefore, in order for the several states and territories to successfully tax national banks, it be. comes necessary that there should be a general statute under which alL banks, banking corporations and banking asso citations, could be assessed and taxed by the same standard. The legislature of Arizona, therefore, in enacting such universal statute, in the conception enun- ciated a principle relieving such banks,
 banking corporations and associations from tax upon its several distinct pieces of property, and this principle is stated as follows:
 "Shares of stock in a corporation possesses no intrinsic value over and above the actual value of the property of the corporation for which they stand and represent and the assessment and taxation of such shares and also the corporate property, would be double tax ation.
 If it were not for the enunciation of this principle by the legislature of Ari- Zona, I am convinced that the banking institutions of this territory could be as sessed upon its capital stock, upon it's real property and the stockholders could be assessed for their shares of stock, which they may hold. This provision applies equally to national and state banks and provides a method for such assessment and it provides that no bank, banking corporation or assoeia. ton shall be assessed at greater rate than moneyed capital in the hands of individual citizens of the territory. The banker, after he makes his return of the shares held by the respective in, dividuals finds that he has been assessed 75 per cent of the value of the shares, and that the merchant and other persons have been assessed at 30 per cent on their property, then he asks if he can be relieved of such an unjust valuation, but when he is asked whether or not other moneyed capital is assessed at a higher rate than he is, he says they are not. But the merchant, grocery man and farmer, he says, pays less percentage than ] do. This cannot be relieved by equity, for the reason that all the assess ing power is required to do is not to as sess banks and banking corporations at a greater rate than other moneyed cap ital, The courts of our country have construed ''moneyed capital to mean money used in eofipet;ttton with srcn banks and the property of tsse marchant and farmer is not used in competition with banks. Therefore, they are in a separate and distinct class. Then the banker asks for some relief The only relief that I now know of is to prevail upon the legislature to strike from or laws the two words "moneyed capital. " Then let the statute read, "provided that none of such shares shall not be taxed at higher rate than is levied upon other property in the hands ot individual citizens In other words, strike out "moneyed capital" and in sert the word "property. Then we would be in a position to review and correct the erroneous Judgment of as sessors in assessing shares of banks at = ( ,,arLyaf ragh yra Ina and assessing merchants and farmers at 90 per cent of their value. They give as an exense for assessing banks at 70 per cent of their value that the earning ca paeity is greater because 1t is represent Cd tyy money. ! submit that the canning capacity of certain buildings and strue- lures in this great commonwealth IS greater by two-fold than the shares ot stock of the banks and banking asso- citations within the confines of thls ter ritOry. Tsike for example, MT. mas S1.O00, or ten shares of the capital stock of given bank that pays him 10 per cent, and "B" has an equal amount of money in a business building that pays him 1j per cent per annum. on the first, A pays 75 per cent of its val nation and on the latter E pays o0 per cent. It would be just for both to pay the same percentage on one as on the other. Of course, the valuation on the two being the same. This seems to pc the system, especially in Arizona, where the assessor appears to assess all proper ty at 50 per cent of its cash value. This is unjust upon it's face, yet, under the present system of taxing banks, we can not be relieved so long as other money ed capital is assessed in the same man. ner. But if we can prevail upon the legislature to strike from the laws the words "moneyed capital" and to insert the word property" then every kind of property, shares of stock, real estate, etc, will be upon common basis and all persons owning property would then contribute a just proportion to the ex- +pense of the government.
 The shares being personal property of the owner, then the standard of valua- tion would be the same as all other "personal property" and the shares would then be placed in the class of personal property and not in the class n. sel