Evening star., 1916-08-10

promptly corrected, and Mr.. johnson him
self, if he can be convinced that he has
been misled, will undoubtedly be disposed
to make this correction.
Indictment of Undertaxation.
The Arst vital issue I'm respect to
which Representative johnson and the
ington's comparative tax burden.
He says that Wayhington is the light
est taxed OF American cities, and that
1t bears only about one-half the aver
age tax burden. We say that Washing
ton is one of the heaviest taxed i'm the
list Of comparable American cities, and
tnat its peculiar conditions and dis
abilities render Its tax burden harder
to bear than TINT of any other COM
parable American city.
Bofh MIR. johnson and washIngton
use census h&ures to Justify their con-
IclusiOns, but not the same census Ag-
ures. The census authorities discrimf-
nate between the two sets of figures,
and approve those which we use and
discredft those used by MIR. johnson ~
unverihed xuesswork.
Different standards Of measurement
Of comparative tax burdens are em-
plOyed to reach these contradictory con-
We compare the total tax burdens In
dollars and cents actually paid in taxes,
the aggregate tax Ieviea or tax re-
ceipts, i'm respect to- cities most closely
npproxfmating Washington In popula-
tlOn and environment, and we compare
spectfYe cities to the total tax Ievies
and tax receipts In respect to all COM
parable cities whether much larger or
smaller than Washington.
lnES f0lx l,f-
measurement comparative tax rates,
modified by the application to them Of
the reported relation of assessed to true
valuation. Thus WashfnGtOn's tnx rate
is @1.5O on n reported twO-thirds as
sessment. which makes Washingon'x
nominal rate ON true value $1.OO. Bal
timOre's tax rate i'm 1918 yyns 1.s0I and
it's reported ASSIGNMENT was full value,
tax rate TO compare with WashinSt0n's
was I.S9I under this misleading stand
ard Of measurement; and with the
other cities that are compared with
Washington.
The factor in this standard of meas
urenent which raisiies ii and renders
1t worthless II In tin. reported relation
Of aAsessed to true value. These re-
ports are not mnde by census officials
OF verified by them. They are the
suesswork estimates Of irresponsible
municipal officials, who do not tell the
truth about them and who do not pre-
tend to tell the truth about them.
Reported full or 100 per cent assesS-
ment valuations are found to vary In
different cities from 70 per cent to SIS
per cent of full value. The standard Of
measurement applied to these cities
which involves this fuctuatfnE factor
varies c0rrespOndIngly, and becomes
absolutely worthless this account to
give accurate results In comparing
eities. Ii lacks the vital essential of
uniformity.
Mr.. JohnsOns' yardstick of measure
ment contracts and expands while In
use. The facts ard figures brought be-
fore the joint committee show that this
kind of yardstfck is over thtrty-six
inches in length in measuring WASH
lnxtOn's tnx burden, fs approximately
thirty-nix inches In length i'm measur-
ing the tax burdens of "a very Few other
cities, and in the mass OF American
cities varies from twelve inches to
thirty inches in length.
What accuracy can be expected from
the use Of q standard of measurement
which, instead Of being uniform,
shrinks from one-ha1f to one-auarfef
Of it's nominal length In Its application
to some citier and In not to certainty
Of precisely the snme length IN any Two
citiess The preposterous results Sc
cured by the application OF this stand
nrd OF measurement to comparative
civ t,x burdens are Inevitable. and re-
Snce To nm nbsurdfty the claims OF this
s1.ndord Of measuremcnt to any rclia-
bility vhatsOever'
False and True Standards of Tax