The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1918-07-31

make 'he assessment and June b,
1918, I returned them in accordance
with law. The next day. June 6, re-
ceiTed letter signed ny YOU and the
! Hon. G. Lee Moore. auditor of pub
/ lie accounts, dated June s. 1918.
I'm this you informed me that at
meeting of the state tax board held
iJune 3, the board adopted a resolu-
Ition to the effect that the instructions
! heretofore given me to assess the in
I tangibles of the holding corporations
were rescinded and instead / was di~
rected not to make such assessment
upon the ground. to use the language
Of your resolution, that the board be
/ ING Of the opinion that the latest leg
/ islation clearly indicates the intention
/ of the general assembly to be that in
tangible personal property employed
/ in other states by corporations char
tered under the laws of this state
which heretofore have not done or
which hereafter will do no business
! In Virginia, are not subject to taxa
ttton for either omitted or current
taxes"
Points Out Error
y gu are in error when YOU say in
your letter of July II, 1918. that prior
+ 10 June s, 1918. had been duly di-
Irected by the state tax board not to.
:
sonal property, money and income
omitted for the year 1918 belonging
TO domestic corporations claiming to
do no part Of their business in vir-
ginia. | did not receive such direc-
tion until June g. the day after the
report had been made.
1T may he complete reply to your
demand for an explanation rs 10 why
! assessed the holding corporations
for the year 1918 to say that / did
exactly what your board and your
legal adviser directed me to do. l
simply carried ont the law rs was my
honnden duty. In doing so, / reported
taxable values amounting to 1892 .f07,-
o'', the tax on which is So .205, 02o-4.
on which the state of Virginia will
receive f,50S. 69g..T, and the city of
Richmond S696,322 On these
values the taxes have been assessed
and the collection is now In the hands
OF the city and state administrative
officers.
Call for an explanation is the sug-
seStlon of A grievance. It may be
that majority Of the board feels ag-
srieved that ! did not anticipate your
change of mind or was not controlled
by lnofhcial reports of such change
AS to this, 1t may be said that it would
seem highly improbable that two
members of your board, yourself and
the Hon. c. Lee Moore, neither of
whom is n lawyer, would reverse a
considered decision taken upon the
ADVICE of an official and skilled L.
&ai adviser. which decision had been
ofhciaily communicated to me as "A
guide to my official action,
Change Highly Unexpected.
Inherent improba bilitv of such a
change of front on your part js erp-
phaslzed by the fact that If your sec
ond decision stands and your first de
cision is reversed the taxpaverS Of
Virginia will lose the sum of So 205 -
o22.74. | had the right to assume
until officially notified to the con-
trary. that you would abide by the
law as given by your official legal ad-
,iSer' NOR was II easy to anticipate
mat you and the Honorable c. Lee
Moore would. against the advice of
your able legal adviser. hold that as a
matter of law there was a general In =
tehtion on the part of the legislature
10 make gift of upwards of two mil
I'"Hs OF doliars to certain private in
tefests and that this intention is To ha
gathered not by what the general as
lsempIy wrote into the enacted law
put from the psychological atmos-
IN winch Its members APP
|
ms generous attitude of tho lepis
",lFe mlhd is more incomprehensible
"Hth we remember that the state
sorelN needs the revenue So great 10
,he state need that as governor Won
Kept the general assembly in session
neSohu lis appointed time, to insist
that appropriations to our srbools ana
asylums, regarded as necessary shonld
ne cut down So great was the need
"l revenue that state taxes were in
cFeased-on intangible personal nron
erty' consisting of stocks. bonds
notes, capital, etc, twelve 12cc) ner
cent ana on real estate and tangible
oe!sollaI property consisting Of
household effects. farming. implA
ments. cattle and agricultural pro-
DUCTS eighty (S0%l per cent.
venture TO assert that but for
these TWO enactments mentioned
there would have been no accession
Tor any increase OF taxes and no de
hcl' could have occurred in the states
retehue such as likely will exist in
lSlH. II seems therefore, that under
those conditions. II the general as
sehbiy ny retrospective act Intended
10 give away more than $1,000, 900
IL would have used definite language
to such effect
1T Is due. however in candor tn
say mat even II had received your
OF after returning my report. I wouId
nave still, nevertheless. made the re.
port. The governor and the state tax
board are creatures of law and as much
bound by law as the humblest citi-
zen. The state tax board has no right
to command me to violate my oath
OF office and to disregard the plain
mandate of law interpreted by its
own law officer. l could not become
a party to the loss to the taxpayers of
Virginia of more than 81. 900, 900 nv
sMbservient obedience to an obviously
Illegal demand.
States Right Safeguarded,
Even IL | am now mistakens even
| II the majority of your honorable
board was wrong first and right after
wards, my offending can work no ulti-
mate injury to the state, the city of
I Richmond. or the assessed corpora
tons. The courts are open to correct
any mistake, IL any has ben made.
/ II, on the other hand. the Majority of
your board Is wrong in this second