The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1912-02-06
RICHMOND STANDS
TO LOSE S581,OOO
Speaker Byrd Declares Whites
Plan Will Bankrupt Vir-
ginia Cities.
PRESENTS CLEAR ARGUMENT
lily Licenses Would Be Lost
Forever to State and to
municipalities.

segregation Of taxes according to
the plan devised by Hugh A. White
would bankrupt every city aud nearly
every town In the state. This lS the
statement made BY Speaker Byrl after
an inVestiga ton OF the suojec. follow
Ing the Introduction OF Mr. Wn.te's
bill
Before the House Finuncc Commit
toe yesterday morning. Mr.. White
asked for hearing on his measure.
which will be had tomorrow morning.
At the same time the Montague bill
will be heard.
The statement by Mr.. Byrd. given
out last night, is as follows:
Tho great difficulty attending any
reform OF our outrageously unequal
and unjust tax system is illustrated by
Mr.. Whites proposed segregation bill.
Mr. White opposes tax euualI2sati On
on the ground that segregation Is
now feasible and proper Whom chal.
!enged to offer bill to such effect. he
oners measure which PROF.. les that
the subjects of taxation shall be suS-e-
gated so that the cities and ,ounti as
shall have all the real estate and tnn-
sible personal property tnxea md the
State oil the railroad. bank, insurance,
license and Intangible property tax,s.
and that the counties and tiles sha II
pay the cost of criminal expenses in
all misdemeanor cases and In all fell
ony cases where the costs are less than
500. This law he proposes shall go
into effect on July /. 1918.
Defects of Pinn.
The very obvious objections to this
bill are:
Il. When the law goes into effect
in 1913 the license taxes Will have all
been paid into the municipal treas
uries "a OF March /. and the land and
personal property tax will have been
assessed as OF February 1. 1918. The
State would get only 80 cents IN the
500 OF Intangible personal prop .ety
for 1918, and the State would neither
then nor at any time under this law
get any CT the municipal licenses. AS
the law prohibits the cities from get
ting these licenses and does not pro-
vide how the State can get them, they
would after 1918 be lost entirely.
"2. The State could not in any case
set what tho cities are getting now
because the city licenses vary In the
various municipalities and the State
rate must be uniform on the same
class of business.
"3. Some machinery must be pro-
vided to specify how the localities
shall pay their criminal expenses
"4. The sufficient objection to this
bill is that 1t would bankrupt every
city and practically every town in the
State.
Net Losses to Cities.
The net loss to the cities would
be as follows, estimating that the
criminal expenses payable by them un-
der the White bill would be 20 per
cent. Of the total expenses:
Alexandria, si4.s9a.s6; Bristol, SAL
94a.41; Charlottesville, s2o.6i6.40: Dan
vi riclr
1864; Lynchburg. s23S,679.se; New
port News, s+o.659.2S; Norfolk, s31s.-
S91.37; Petersburg. s72.539.60: Ports
mouth, s60,4452e: Richmond, s6sl,43s-
IL: Roanoke, s253,l 5000; Suffolk, Sl2,-
$3.50; Staunton. S42.351.90; winches-
ter, s2+s6S.oo.
"5. The assessment of intangible
property would be left to the local
commissioners of the revenue who
would not have even the incentive of
local revenue to assess this property
honestly.
When an intelligent man like Mr..
Hugh a. White is willing to become
responsible for bill which would re-
suit in such disaster, some idea may
be realized of the immense difficulties
to be encountered in any constructive
handing OF this question.
1.-THE proposed tax equalization bill
mas DeeH CdTcluiIy conSluereQ ana is
nothing like as drastic us many SINH
lar laws now in successful operation
in other State. There are only four
States in the Union besides Virginia,
which have no system of equalization.
II may be added that the Tax Com
mission considered a number of
schemes of tax segregation which
looked we'll on the face, but which, on
being subjected 10 the test of their
actual results, were found to be alb
solutcly unjust in their operat on"