The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1916-01-13

/ npoa which the life 81 the State must
] aspena under tho ne& law. 80. I
Rrswlr Thnx W0nAd wue1uw KAxfnre
ft.mnns not - fsresttea that ans
| failure on the part Of the nfats 70 cob
iect this revenue from thees sources
hitherto uptsxrd must result IN rsiun'
posing 1 large part. or all. 81 the Htkts
tax OF thirty ave cents On the hum
bred dollars Formerly applying ON real
estate and tangible propArfy. thus
placing additional burdens on prop
erty already taxed because OF the fall
ure ~ the State TO provide and main
tain ways and means to discover UNI
taxed properly.
The participation of cpuntiss, dis
tricts OF counties and municipalities
in the tax on intangible property has
became optional. and In any event IL
so ;aconsequentai as to give the local
assessing and taxing ofiicers much less
interest In the discovery OF fntangtbles
than ever the small Interest they have
hitherto felt In this matter.
So Il is by no means safe to rely on
county. town or city officers TO use the
extraordinary diligence and initiative
necessary to provide adequate reye-
nues to the state treasury. 1T IL
to my mind absolutely essential TO
the life OF the new plan of partial
&ekIGkaIiOh tHhl tAAhiAhCAH ia fOSot 80
shal continue to perform the func-
tions, which were enlarged by the
new law only to the extent of giving
them the same access to the books
and accounts of the living as the law
has heretofore given them to the
books and accounts of the dead, Such
access either in the case OF the living
or .hc dead, should be no greater and
no less than IL necessary TO obtain
Just contribution from such sources
to tho support Of the State and its In
stitutions.
Objection Made.
Objection is made that the pro-
cesses of examiners OF records are
inuuisitorial The answer Il that they
are intended TO be inqufsicorfal, and
they lose their effectiveness when
they cease 10 he inqthsiturial. 10
must be remembered. however, that
no examiner OF records under the
present Law can add one f0sa to the
hound under his oath 70 give 20 his
own holdings when he makes proper
return thereof 10 the taxing ofJlcers
Proper returns OF all taxpayers have
always been supposed TO make full
disclosures of all taxable property
owned by the taxpayer.
The commissioner of the revenue
and treasurer nave rlEnt 10 TINS
knowledge, az has also every ofncer OF
the State whose business II Is 70
handle tax returns. There In no law,
| SO far as l know, 10 shteid such re-
| turns from legitimate pubic anspec-
! ton in the auditors ONCE, though !
| VIII say here parentneticaiiy that L
would favor n measure designed TO
strengthen the present law forbidding
undue publicity, and especially forbid
ding the publication IN the newspapers
of a taxpayers return, except when
Fthe same has been made public In
soma litigated question before q court.
Inquisitoria' methods. however op-
| jectiorabie, can ascertain no fact
which II In not the duty OF the tax
payer to state for himself. and since
such methods under the present law
| can add nothing to the publicity, 80
they can add nothing to the burden OF
/ taxpayers who mako thar intangible
| returns as visible AZ the law requires
/ other classes of property to be made.
| Ii ~ gratifying to note substantial
progress in voluntary returns OF In
/ tangible property, but Il is source
OF no little regret that 30 many hold
| ers CT this class of property continue
1 to offer. obstacles and objections to
| the processes, which their own recall
citranc-v- as taxpayers has rendered
! necessary.
f. faaxv Must BE kinforred. =
! 7 feel 1t my duty to say that as
/ interpret my duty TO the people oil
ifhfu ufafn' 7 am reeffire6 with what