Newark post., 1910-08-03

and collecting of capitation tax from
every male citizen Of the State OF the
age OF twenty-ont years or upwards;
but such tax to be collected in any
county shall be uniform throughout
that county
quote this to call attention to the
term used, viz: "Capitation Tax" This
term is of frequent use and seems to
be interchangeable with poll tax"
The section above referred to can
have no reference to the rates of per-
sons" Of the school laws for two
reasons. First, the term "capitation
or poll tax, we'll known word in
the constitution, is not used If this is
what the trainers of the law meant
when they made the school laws, it
would have been very easy matter to
have used the old familiar term, and
that they did not use the old term is
evidence that they did not mean what
the old term means.
The second reason is that it speaks
OF uniformity throughout the county,
making the county the unit, while the
Unite for the school law is the district
When the term rates OF persons
was inserted in the school laws it
must have meant something different
from capitation tax and have been sub
ect to some other law of the consti-
tuition. In the same section and article
above referred to we find provision for
this term rates OF persons" 1t says
all taxes shall be uniform upon the
same class of subjects within the terri
toral limits Of the authority levying
the tax
THIS will apply to the district or to
any territory large or small, and pro-
videS that the tax shall be uniform
for each class into which the tax paw
ers may be divided, j. e., all who come
within the c.asS ci iaborers must be
assessed the same amount. and all
skilled lahorers must have uniform
| assessment. And in like manner
throughout the different classes the
rates shall be uniform throughout each
class.
In this view OF the subject, should d
taxpayer resist the payment Of taxes
all that he could claim would be that
he was paced in the wrong class or
| that he YVES not assessed the same
amount as others OF his class, and
should he win his suit all he would gain
! would be a reduction OF so cents to 81
| on his tax. 1t would be much cheaper
to pay the tax and request of the
! Board that he be placed hereafter in
| the proper class.
But let us suppose that the rates OF
person could be interpreted as capita
| ton tax or poll tax and one should
| win suit against the Board on that
Interpretation. what would be the re-
st,1t C,,,,,' .N.,, Ia. pn,,I ,,r,,,1I he
compelled to make the rates of per
| sons uniform throughout. Instead OF
| assessing some at 5000 and others at
| $500, some one sum would be settled
| upon for all
Say $4oo or 5000. Suppose it should
| be $500: Who would benefit by it
| All who are now assessed at 5000 or
$3.50 would suffer in having their taxes
| increased. Would those who are now
assessed more than $500 benefit by it
| We think not. The assessor has been
very lenent n the matter of personal
| property. He is expected to assess all
personal property at its actual value
| II there is to be no distinction in the
! rateS OF persons il would only be prop
er and Just that more particular note
! should be made OF personal property
| And everyone knows that those who
are now paying in 500 or $500 as rate
OF persons have more costly persona
property than the others as a genera
thing. 1t would seem to be the part
! of wisdom to let the matter stand a,
it is and # different basis is dcsjrec
for the assessment OF school purposes
carry it to the Legislature and have
the law changed
JOEL s. GlLFILLAN.