Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1916-07-23

new system and should at tho same
time be prepared to defend its entire
and inherent Justice and to resist ef-
forts which will doubtless be mado
TO place again the old burden upon
their backs. probably j.. the shape OF an
ordinance purporting to abolish the
tax on capital. but substituting for it
tax on purchases. yielding the same
amount as a S1.40 rate on capital.
TAN MANY a LITTLE;
NOT FEW EXCESSIVELY
Indeed. in an interview Friday, Col
lcctor Il. G. Walford is reported as
saving that the city will have to get
this money tsl5O,000) through Icvying
license tax on the amount OF capital
employed in making purchases. or by
increasing the rate OH real estate and
tangible personal property" Far bet
ter, in my humble judgment, this lat
ter alternative than thu former. Tax
the many Il little. not the few excess
sivcly. II may not be good politics, for
the many can out-votc uhc few, but
1t is inherently right and just that
the ordinary burdens OF government
should be borne by all the people. Be
sides. If the tax is paid by the mer-
chants. it will be merely u primary
payment. for they will be compelled
TO include II in the price charged the
customer--that uncompla lining goat. the
ultimate consumer.
But better way still would be for
the city's financial authorities to &C
ccpt the result OF the case, If affirmed
on appeal. and cut their coat accord
ing TO the cloth on hand. When II
commercial corporation finds that 1t
has over-valued an asset or source Z, {
revenue. il cuts expenses and other
wise adapts Itself to its situation. 1t
rarely assesses the stockholders. and
when ii does, 1t assesses all, not q few.
Aud when municipal corporation
finds that in estimates of revenue under
a Statewide system. of (which ii is
only single unit. IL has materially
erred III It's construction Of the tax
laws ana has collected from one class
OF its citizens more money than 1t
was entitled to. tho sensible thing
would seem TO he TO retrench and no
/ longer incur obligations. its ability ia
discharge which is based upon the lost
asser. Much wiser such course than
/ for its doctors OF finance TO say, We'll
] we have begun to spend the money
/ and therefore. va must continue to
! spent; il. and there Is nothing for us
/ 10 DO Sat raise the amount in another
/ form from tho same class spread
out the burden among the owners OF
real estate and tangible personal
]: the Papers correctly report the
meeting or the merchants on the South
side. the position of one OF them is
remarkable. Claiming TO represent 8
retail groccrs' association, he said that
"the merchants preferred to have the
tax rate-S1.4o on the 500 capital
remain the same, rather than a deduc-
;ioc IN their rate" surely either the
millennium has come or this representa-.
tive does not represent the sentlipent OF
the merchants of The city. The re
marks OF Naior " l!iam H. Sands, the
well-known tax expert. state the case
accurately. No one, whether he be
merchant. mechanic or farmer, Will say
tina; he prefers TO pay $3.50 in take:
rather than 81. or course, # the mer.
chants really desire TO submit to
gross and palpable discrimination like
this the matter is ended, but If hav'
ing been Informed OF their rights un'
der the new law, they desire 10 assert
them and he taxed as are other owner;
or property of identically the same
class. the authorities OF the city OF
Richmond will be compelled to recoS'
nice the inherent justice OF their de
lnand and look 10 other sources 10 make
up the difference. Of which the tax o.
purchases will no. be one. ! have
been told to-day. although al this writ
ing ! have not heen able 10 verify !,
that the city OF Norfolk has volun
tarily adapted its schedules TO the lev
LAM IF |. be true, why cannot Rich
nord do what Norfolk does?