Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1916-06-20

include the city's great workshops. its
largest industrial plants, represented In
other cities by mills and factories
standing for millions Of taxable prop
erty. Here our great mills and fac
tories and workshops are Uncle Sans
property and do not figure at all in the
assessment roll.
The proposition of $744. Ooo, 900 val
uation in 1872 is to assess and tax 4
decreasing fraction of the capitals
area. deprived of the heaviest factors
of real estate assessment. at a figure
which values 1t as worth twice as much
in that year as the whole of wealthy,
busy. industrial Baltimore. with $685.
1874 greater population: nearly twice
as much as the whole Of the magnifi-
cent city of Cincinnati, wISh its great
industrial establishments and its pop
uiation 44.I67 larger than that of the
District
The taxed fraction of Washington
would be valued at nearly $4,000. 900
more than Baltimore and Minneapolis
combined: at nearly as much as Balti-
more and Cincinnati combined: at
eAs. 900 900 more than Buffalo and New
ark combined: at $76OO0.O0O moro than
three times as much as the whole of
New Orleans: over s17o,00O.0o0 more
than New Orleans. st. Paul and Louis
willie combined.
Let US consider the unbearable tax
burden which would follow such excess
sive realty valuation. At the present
tax rate Washington would raise in
taxes on full valuation as proposed,
from its 744.00o,oo0 of realty, s11,160,
900.
The taxed fraction of researches
Washington would thus raise from its
realty alone more than was raised on
realty and personally combined in 1912
by the great, rich and prosperous in
dustrial cities of Cleveland (total levy
$10.o19.s0O, Baltimore ($S.S43,006), De-
troit (S9.617,55O, Buffalo ($S,429,73D,
San Francisco (s1o.463.7o1). Milwaukee
($6.s5s,113). Cincinnati (s7.5s3,515). Los
Angeles (sS,1s7.7os). Newark ($s.s4s.-
S02) and New Orleans S5.1S2.42D. all
larger cities with far more resources
than Washington. The taxed fraction
Of the capital would under this valua-
ton pay more taxes on its realty alone
than the realty and personality levies
of Minneapolis ($5.S92.24I and Jersey
/. City (s3.s1o.95D combined; a little less
than Seattle Cs4.3o7.235), Kansas City
(s4.115,5s5). and indianapolis .($3,466,-
s65) combined about three times as
much as the total tax of Indianapolis
or Providence or Rochester or Denver
or Louisville; over four times as much
as the total levy Of st. Paul and near
ly six times as much as the total levy
of Atlanta.
The property taxpayer of Washington
actually raised in 1912 total levy of
$s.ass.9s4. and to do SO endured the
S15.15. a greater tax burden than
that imposed upon 147 out of the 1874
American cities The $744,0 Zoo, 900 prop
osition proposed offhand to more than
double that per capita tax lexy: by the
tax on realty alone. and to make Wash
ington's per capita tax levy much
greater than that of, any other Ameri-
can city, more even than New York
with its vast wealth and it's assessed
valuation of s9.177.495.620.
The 44,500 Washington taxpayers,
$4,000 of them small property owners.
crippled and cramped in money max
Ing in every conceivable fashion, would.
II this valuation were not discarded as
preposterous, pay in taxes to sustain
the nations city on a national scale
more than the aggregated taxpayers of
New Orleans. Louisville and st. Paul
pay in municipal taxes 49, ----- -
CD Study of the so-called George re-
port discloses that this $144.0O0, 900
valuation of Washington in 1912 was
the erroneous conclusion from insult
dcient or false premises of single wit
ness. Herbert ]. Browne, and was
grossly and grotesque1y excessive.
: The very method of calculation, en-
ployed by Mr.. Browne to reach this
valuation condemned il to utter in
accuracy. Mr.. Browne neither assesses
himself nor complies the expert as
easements of others But generaliHng
from comparatively few cases OF un-
erassessments tmost of which turn
1naccurate), he multiplies the assess
ment of every piece of land in the sub
urban area by five; and that Of every
piece in the business and fine residence
the sectional figures which he adds to
constitute his imposing and obviously
misleading total valuation. In other
words. no other witness than Mr..
v 1,He Of the whole city, or
to a sectional valuation reached by
multiplying the assessment Of every
lot in it by an arbitrary number as five
value. few other witnesses testified
rs to values OF particular lots; Mr..
Browne generalized incorrectly from
their specific evidence. 1t makes little
difference TO US today whether Mr..
Brow ne was right or wrong in his ale
CATION of specific cases of underas-
sessment- in 1912; but when he uses
such cases as the basis of generaliza-
lions concerning the value Of entire
sections and Of the whole city. his foun-
dation cases must be not only absolute
ly accurate. but typical. The evidence
before the joint congressional commit
tee demonstrated conclusively that Mr..
I. Brownies selected cases were neither
typical nor generally accurate.
90 Every corroborative witness to
the fairness of the $744,000.000 valua-
lion TO whom Mr.. Browne appeals fails
him. He made Mr.. George, using Mr..
Brownies words as witness, say in
his report:
The total taxable realty values of
the District of Columbia. hxed by your
committee at $744,000.000. fall we'll
within the sum indicated by a forth
coming census bulletin. which places
the entire realty value of the District
ut $1,000. 100000. Deduct from this
$500. 1000 900 for federal and municipal
real property, and allow $4,000. 900 for
churches. legations. schools. hospitals,
and other exemptions, and the remain
der S715. 000, 900, is still $3l, 00o. 600 above
the conservative estimate of your COM
unittee-
Soon after this statement was made.
questioned as TO its accuracy. He re-
piled in writing that the census bureau
had made no estimate of the value Of
real estate in the District of Columbia
aimee 1904: that the ONCE was formu-
iating plans for investigation of the
general subject for the year 1912. but
had prepared no figures for a bulletin.
and that none would be issued for at
least one and probably two years from
date.
The bulletin predicted by Mr. Browne
has been recently Us15) issued. 1t esti-
mated the total values in the District
in 1912 at s1.I13.s57.1l2. 1t estimated
all the personally In the District at
S27I, SS3,22I. the exempt realty at $685.
|, b4o.161. and the taxable realty at $685.
,ls3.73o.
The total is only 5000, 900 away from
| Mr. Brownies guess, but this total in
ciudes s271 900. 900 of personality. ex-
empt or taxable. and Mr.. Browne in his
deductions from this total makes no
allowance whatever for the personally
| valuation. with the result that the gov