Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1917-12-15
MOORE D|sACREEs WITH
MAYOR AS TO TAXATION
state Auditor Points to Great In
crease in Intangible As
SesSlncnts.
MAYOR AINsL1E STANDS PAT
Quotes City Auditor to Prove That
Segregation Is Costing City $685.
002 Per Year-City Also Loses by
Other Legislation.

cared yesterday I'm statement In
which he pointed out tina: this method
or levytng taxes had resulted in con.
siderable gains to the city Mayor
George Ainslie took issue with Mr.
Moore, and asserted that. according to
statement made to him by City Audi
tor Crenshaw, segregation had cost the
municipality s20S.s02 last year.
Statements from tho State officer and
the Richmond executive came as the
result Of the Mayors call for tax
conference I'm this city January be-
tween representatives OF the cities and
towns OF Virginia. III his call the
Mayor declared that segregation and
, other legislation I'm recent years had
resulted in loss Of revenue TO the
city OF Richmond Of s4Ss6o4 This loss
was attributed TO the segregation sys-
lem OF taxation. the loss from railroa d
rolling stock and through liquor
licenses
LOssEs NOT PROPERLY
CHARGEABLE TO SEGREGATION
II know the city Of Richmond, has
lost considerable revenue because she
can no longer lay liquor license tax"
said f!r. Moore, land I have understood
me city. by its roluntar" act OF chang
ing the system OF tax on merchants
capital TO license tax on purchases
docs not receive ar large an amount
Of revenue from this source as she
formerly did. Any loss the city has
suffered upon these two subjects OF
taxation is not due TO the tax system
Of segregation.
Know the city Of Richmond, as
o'her cities, has lost. before the seq
'esation plan or taxation was put in
operation, considerable revenue il was
receiving from the tax upon rolling
STOCK or public service corporations
ihis loss is not chargeablc to SER
reGatson."
Mt. Moore said that under the seE
resation system the city was per
United to add 25 cents on each s,oo
assessed valuation OF real cs,.,. 800
tangible personal property, and tina,
Understood the city did add this
additional tax and realized from tbis
source several hundred thousand dol
iaTs or revenue she did not preyious,,.
receive.
BRINGING OFT INTANGIDLES
Mt HERETOFORE TAXED AT ALL
In 1871. he said. the city was taxing
SS2'ooo'eoo OF intangible property. er-
e.us!Ee OF capital of merchants which.
az me rate OF $!.40 on 500, would Weld
Ftoo,I1. Taxable value Of ...:chnona
i n.a property In 1917 was 5000
WV exclusive or merchants capital On
ms Va>uation the city levied taxes ar
.He ra'e OF 80 cents on each 500. MAX
ing total revenue si3O.01..
onoer the system OF segregation.
Increased SSifooo. 600 I'm three go.
put owing TO the difference in rates
ne ciiy has experienced loss of s32G
quo which is iIily Offset and ,vercnp,e
.! me 2o-cent tax on cnch $40, as
sessed value on real -esta,e, tangible
soa' property and public service
GO: poration property, which Il was ner.
4
fnli' fair and conclusive discussion ana
'"hsioeration OF this matter to inform
me pubic the specific items unon which
Inc city Of Richmond has suffered los
OF several hundred thousand dollars
revenue as I, result OF the present sys-
lem Of taxation.
so generally accountable !. ,ha o.,
system now IN force IN this state RI
me great majority OF the political sub
divisions thereof. that il is surprisinr
10 ma that the largest community. en-
?cg'nE the greatest powers and priv
heses OF taxation should feel Il re-
CURES TO be fostered by the State, and
lars Will show that any city AZ tha
has been, or will be
in its fiscal affairs ms
result OF the existing system OF taxa
ton
MAYOR SAYS HE MADE no
ATTACK ON SEGREGATION
Mayor Ainslie declared that it was
unnecessary to twist his letter into
IN assault on tho segregation system
OIL iaNauon. since no attack had been
made. Ills invitation to Virginia
Mayors had contained two pr;ncinai
statements. One was: "It seems also
10 be fact that all the cities of the
state. on account OF that legislation
~ e., the particular segregation law on
The statute booksl. had their revenues
seriously crippled
He said that Senator J. i. West. Of
ne city or Suffolk. had written him
hat segregation had caused deficit
Of about $4,000 in that city "So sys-
en- or taxation Is q success which does
tot provide enough revenues at rea- |
,onab!e rates for the various cities"
SENATOR West wrote. That is the ,ut- !
Standing defect in the present syste-:,."
William II. Snead, commissioner OF ,
-evenue for the city OF Lynchbure, is
Iuoted as saying: Operation OF the |
state segregation tax system entailed ,
1 loss Of approximately ss7,500 to the
'ity OF LynchburE for the year 1916.
rho end OF the fiscal year will show
net loss In taxes 10 the city some-
what in excess of the $4,000 loss in
.?i6 Tho city faces 4 critical situa.
ion during the coming year. in so far
~ municipal improvements are con-
.crncd.
'U1S RICHMOSD's Loss
AT s20S.002 PER YEAR
Mayor .Ainslie said that City Audito,
stated to him that Richmond
ost $2OS.902 in taxes from the sesrega-
ion law. His statement continues, as
olows
These are statements Of well-in-
ormed public officials in different parts
i the state concerning their cities
they cannot be wholly ignorant about
UGH matters. The second statement
hat made In my letter was: The re-
'ort Of our City Auditor for the last
Iscal year will show that State Iegis-
alton passed within the last few years
las caused on annual loss Of revenues
o our city amounting TO $4Ss,604,'
here is nothing In that statement to
he effect that the loss mentioned was
ue to the segregation law alone. al
houeh some careless readers 30 con-
trued It. That statement exactly as ]
uoted II Is in the auditors report for
he last fiscal year. The report was
published in all the papers here when
t was issued some time in last March.
'ho same statement wae mazda In |