The Washington times., 1915-10-26

any one project. This is the National
Capital and the Government may or
may not call upon the citizens here
to contribute. My idea In that tho
Capital should be taken over by the
Government and run under It's own
name and not by an alien.
The District Of Columbia II a sham.
1t has no power and no substance at
all. II Is mere shadow and IL
simply Confuses the situation and
confuses the people outside OF WASH
inston. or course the Government
ought to contribute to the Capital:
1t ought to be responsible for II and
pay for II, whether the citizens hero
pay one cent or not"
Rendezvous For Millionaires.
Whether Washington Is a rendezvous
for millionaires who hope to escape. by
residence here. taxation OF Intangible
personal property. was the topic OF halr
an hours spirited debate Between Mr..
NoySs and members of the half-and-
half committee this morning at the
Capitol.
MIR. Noyes, a member OF the Citizens
Committee on Fiscal Relations, was
soon sidetracked from the formal pre-
sentation Of his brief, as he was piled
with question after question regarding
his contention that the District already
bears as heavy a burden OF taxation as
other cities.
The cross fire OF questions began tive
minutes after Mr. Noyes had started
talking. He was asked questions about
values and assessments In Washington
which he and other members OF the
citizens committee failed to answer,
and commissioner Brownlow was ask
present to give details concerning tho
assessment OF property in Washington.
Works Charges Speculation.
SENATOR Works allegation that prop
erty had'been forced up by speculation
In hand also added zest to the hearing.
Mr.. Noyes opened his argument by
showing the high value placed upon
property in this city. He said this
aggregate valuation here exceeded
that of the city of Baltimore by half.
and equaled the combined valuation
of property In New Orleana st. Paul,
and Louisville.
rs It not true that the high values
in Washington are largely due to
specu lative inflences and the efforts
OF real estate men to boost the val
ues OF land" asked Mr.. Works. who
added:
"lf you place that sort OF value on
right you have to complain OF being
taxed for H."
II am not complaining OF this val
uatlon." Mr.. Moves replied. THE
question at issue Is whether in plac-
Ing such valuation on Washington
same scale Of values as that of other
cities. obviously We are either over
assessed or other. cities are very
much underassessed."
Gives Rise To Dispute.
Mr.. Noyes said much OF the mis-
understanding about the taxes borne
by District people was due to the
practice OF basing comparisons on re-
lations OF assessed values to true
values In conjunction with the tax
rate.
At the conclusion Of an argument bv
Mr.. Noyes to show that Washington Is
bearing a tax burden comparable to that
of other cities, senator Works inter-
ruptcd with the objection that the COM
inittee was not sitting to determine how
Washington's taxes compared with
those Of other cities. but what propor-
ton OF the expenses OF maintaining the
Canital should be borne by the Federal
Government.
This object gave rise to a dispute as to
whether the committee could properly
considerable methods by which revenue
Is obtained. az well as the apportion-
ment Of the needed expensc betweeD the
Chiffon Seeks Light.
on ton Of this discussion came the re-
| quest OF Senator Chiffon TO be informed
about the truth OF the allegations made
on the floor OF the Senate that Wash
| ington furnishes a mecca where million.
| aires may dodge taxes on their personal
property;
. | gs, |
this TO be the truth. | have found nc
| evidence Of II. But the charges har,
| been made. and they may be made rgair
when we 20 back to Cong rcss with oui
report and we should l." prepared tC
| answer them
Would Stress Tax Burden.
"our point Is that the primary stres,
in this inquiry should be on the aggre
gate tax burden" Mr. Noyes said
| Our understanding was that this wa!
the question in which you are interest
ed. The question OF how the taxes ar,
TO be apportioned " before US now: tn,
question of how they are to be raised
1t seems to me. is a subject for late
discussion"
| but we are inQuiring about this per
sonal property because tho question 4
apt to be raised insisted Senator Chill
| ton.
Senator Works remarked that thi
question was important because, II
portion OF the citizens OF the Distric
are escaping taxation. then the burdei
could not be said to be uniformly heav!
on all OF them.
We thought the question was 'hov
much. rather than how" said Mr.
Noyes. 1T is we'll known that som
communities place more stress on on
class of taxable property than others
The exemption of personality in tn
District is a matter OF law. Congress
made the law that way. and, OF course
Congress may change It. Assumin
that the total burden on Washington
taxpayers is right. II any relief is to b
har by levytng personal property. the,
the property owners should get tn
benefit of that relief
New Line of Inquiry.
Senator salisbury interjected som
humor into the proceedings when. afte
a eulogy OF Delaware as a wholly desir
able place to live in. he concluded
Now In that glorious State there /
no tax on personal property. yet no on
ever heard of millionaires tiockin