Year: 1868

Ii Is evident TO many who have been called upon
to administer our assessment laws, that the bur
dens of taxation do not bear equally upon all
classes of property This is owing, in part to
the method adopted in making up the list In
some localities the real and portion Of the per-
sOnal, estate, is assessed at about One-half its
value; while in others, it is represented in the
list at its full cash value.


The assessed value of the real and personal es-
tate Of Vermont was, in 1860, nearly eighty-hvc
millions of dollars, while its true value in money,
according 10 the census of that year, was over two
hundred and fifteen millions. The existing laws
require that the real and personal estate shall be
set in the list at " its true value in money. The
adoption Of any other course is unjust as well as
illegal. 1t is the practice, ON the part Of listers
in some localities, to file their lists IN the Town
Clerks office without the oath prescribed BY law,
thereby easing their conscences for any lrregu-
larities in their mode of assessing the property
set in the lists. IL may be well TO enquire II
more faithful discharge Of the duties Of listers
would not he secured hy prescribing some penalty
for their neglect or violation Of the requirements
of the laws


The right Of appeal from the listers lies only in
the party whose property is appraised. 1t has
been suggested, that il would be beneficial 10 give
the right Of appeal to any taxpayer, for Il any
part Of the property in town Is assessed at less
than its true cash value it is matter OF interest
To all taxpayers to have it corrected. Ilns right
ui eppeh would also ensure more Hlthlul uls-
charge of the duties of listers.


The taxation Of personal estate invested IN tins
state by n0n-residents, hast frequently been the
subject OF legislation, and, a. yet, without any
satisfactory result An attempt was made at the
last session Of thei Legislature 10 enact law 70
regulate the taxation Of stock ~ railroads held by
non-residents. The bill passed both houses on
the last night of the session. II was concurred
in By one branch after the other had closed its bu
siness and adjourned. On examination Of the
act, deemed it my duty 10 withhold my approval,
believing that had the attention OF the legislature
been called to the questions involved, the bill
would not have been passed


At the session of 1854, the law was passed 10
which the bill in question was an amendment
While neither affected the tax ON the stock of res


dents the two acts being Identical in that re-
spect, the bill of the last session changed only the
manner of assessing aud collecting the tax upon
nonresident stockholders, and repealed without
reservation the law OF ls5l, (sections ~ and 81,
and 90 of chapter % of the General Statutes)


By the direction of former legislature, pro-
ceedings had been commenced to enforce the col
lection of the tax upon the stock of nOn-residents
in the Vermont 4 Canada Railroad Company A
bill in chancery in behalf Of such stockholders,
was, therefore, brought against the State Treas
urer and an Injunction procured restraining that
officer from. collecting the tax This suit IS now
in the Supreme Court of the United
States and il Il expected will be heard the pres
ent winter. | deem it the part of wisdom to
postpone further legislation on this subject until
the courts have passed upon the questions now
under consideration,


am advised by eminent counsel, that should
the decision of the court he in favor Of the State
the enactinent of the bill Of last session would
render quite doubtful the power 10 collect the
accrued taxes now in arrcars,-estimatc1 10
amount to over one hundred thousand dollars.
The inquiry from interested non-residents in re-
gard to the fate of the bill, since the close Of the
last session, inclnes me to the opinion that there
was design in the amendment not apparent to