Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1912-03-26
TAX BILL
GETSHEARING
CONTINUED from First Page.)

alton the funds held by a life insurance
company, definitely set aside and appor-
toned as a liability of that company, for
the use of it's policy-holders.
1t has been recognized since life insur-
ance began that those who make contr1-
buttons to life insurance, imposing upon
themselves. as has been said, a voluntary
tax, having taxed themselves for the pur-
pose of keeping those who are near
near to them from becoming a public
charge, the State would place no further
imposition upon those funds, but would
relieve them from further taxation. That
was the Feeling up to the time the city
of policy-holders of the Prudential. held
by the company, but apportioned to the
policy-holders, their property, belnging to
them, and decided to subject it to a tax,
for purely local purposes.
You gentleman may remember the agi-
tation which swept over this country in
connection with the regulation of the life
insurance business some years ago, and
resulted, first, in Governor Hughes's in
vestigation of the New York life insur-
ance companies, which brought about GER
tain remedial legislation, followed by Pres
ident Roosevelt calling together the con-
ference OF governors. acknowledgement
and Insurance commissioners to discuss
reform measures for the protection of in
surance ~policyholders; followed again. in
this, State, by the appointment of a select
committee of senators to investigate and
report in regard to such legislation as
might be necessary to protect the rights
Of ~policyholders.
] Otiiil tlidt lillit DOll Ills COlilpdIy anu
all other companies doing business in the
United States had held the funds collect
ed from their ~policyholders on deferred
dividend policies as a part of the general
surplus of the company.
A report was made to the banking and
insurance department of the State of New
Jersey of the apportionment of this fund,
and the State of New Jersey recognized
that that fluid ought not to be subjected
to taxation. A report was made to the
taxing authorities of the city of Newark
and they recognized that that fund should
not be subjected to taxation. Another
year rolled round; tie fund had grown,
increased, became larger, and again was
reported TO the State of New Jersey, and
again the authorities of the State recog-
nized that it should not be subjected to
cred that by a technical construction of
the act providing for local taxation there
was a possibility of subjecting thai fund
to taxation, not because of the inherent
character of that fund, but because of the
fact that the commissioners of banking and
insurance had, in his valuation OF the
liability on policies, but as a separate and
distinct liability-a purely technical ques-
That was an unjust tax, it was an I'M
fair tax. and it was a tax amounting. to
the enormous sum Of three-qurters or a
was directly taken from the funds of our
cy-hold and paid into the treasury
of the city of Newark.
Now. what does that mean? 1t means
Just this, gentlemen: Mr.. Nugent, the city
counsel, In making a speech in Newark in
the campaign last fall, in seeking the re-
election of the administration of which
he is a part, claimed that the city of
Newark would be able, if they could per
petuate this imposition, to spend this ire
mendous sum each year in improving the
city of Newark, without cost to the c1ti-
zens of the city of Newark. He told
them that 1t would mean a s~choolhouse a
year to the city of Newark-paid for by
Prudential policy-holders; that it would
mean miles of street paving in the city of
Newark-to be paid for by Prudential
policy-holders; that it would mean a
lowering of the tax rate-the difference
being made up by depletion of the funds
belonging to the policy-holders of this
Now, they are not willing to wait until
the Court of Appeals has spoken in this
case, but they want to assume the
position of heads they win, tails We lose.
Well, let us go a little further in
this question as to whether the Pru-
Dental has ever evaded paying tax
to the city of Newark. We have paid
to the State of New Jersey in total
taxes he enormous sum of $3,561.63.
We nave paid o the city of Newark,
up to and including the LIST of January.
1912, the enormous sum of $4,100, 261.14.
been paid by the Prudential in taxes
to the city of Newark! l do not think
that looks very much. as IL we were
trying to evade our just obligations,
or that. from the fact that we are