NEW PLANS PROPOSED BY THE COMMISSIONERS.—Without further discussion of the positions taken by the commissioners, adverse to the Massachusetts system of taxation, let an examination be made of the new systems and plans proposed by them. It will be at once admitted, that with whatever of success the objections raised by the commissioners to the methods in use in this Commonwealth have been met, if they have succeeded in devising new systems of taxation, by which the public burdens are more equitably apportioned and more easily collected, every State and nation should gladly avail themselves of the result of their labors, by whatever course of reasoning they have arrived at their conclusions. In the first of the three propositions presented by the commissioners, is a proposal to assess certain corporations, in a manner closely resembling that in use in this Commonwealth. In commending it, the commissioners observe, "that the interests of New York would be subserved, if the state should follow the example of Massachusetts." As this mode of raising revenue has been in force in this Commonwealth long enough to demonstrate its value and effect, and as it is a part of the new system proposed, it can be passed by without further comment than to notice the apparent inconsistency and inequality of a scheme of taxation that taxes a certain part of the personal estate of the community, while other classes of personal property are exempt. For the remaining part of the system proposed, the commissioners recommend the adop tion of one of two plans, either of which, in their opinion, would produce substantial equality in assessment. The first plan is to assess all land (exclusive of buildings) at fifty per cent of its marketable value, and all buildings at their full market value. The commissioners remark, that "it is obviously immaterial, so far as equity is concerned, what standard of valuation is adopted for any given class of property, provided that the standard be uniform." Unquestionably true, if the uniform standard of valuation is alike applied to all the classes of property subjected to assessment. Not true, so far as equity is concerned, if the property assessed is divided into two classes, and one class taxed twice as much as the other. To illustrate: A municipality with a valuation of $10,000,000 real estate, wishes to raise $150,000 by tax. The rate of taxation would be $15 on each one thousand. A trader lives in a house worth $5,000; $1,000 being the value of the land, and $4,000 the value of the building. A farmer lives upon a farm, $4,000 being the value of the land, and $1,000 the value of the buildings. A speculator in town lots has land worth $5,000. The total value of the real estate of each is $5,000, and at one and one-half per cent, the tax of each would be $75.00. Now, suppose you reduce the valuation uniformly fifty per cent, the valuation is $5,000,000, the rate $30.00 on a thousand. The farm and buildings, the house and lot, and the unimproved land, each valued at $2,500, and the tax of each at three per cent, $75.00. But test the plan proposed by the commissioners by these figures. For the purpose of fixing the rate, we take the proportions found in the tax of Boston, for the year 1870, and our municipality has a valuation of land, $5,900,000, buildings, $4,100,000; total, $10,000,000. Land reduced to fifty per cent of its value - $2,950,000, buildings full value, $4,100,000; total valuation, $7,050,000; rate of tax to raise, $150,000 — $21.27. The trader's valuation would be land, $1,000, reduced to $500; building, $4,000; taxable valuation, $4,500; tax, $95.71; the farmer's valuation would be, land $4,000, reduced to $2,000; building, $1,000, taxable valuation, $3,000; tax, $63.81; the speculator's valuation would be, land $5,000, reduced to $2,500; taxable valuation, $2,500; tax, $53.17. When we consider that these several taxes result from the assessment in the same year of an equal amount of visible, tangible property, we certainly need the assurance of the commissioners, "that all taxes distribute themselves," in order to assist us in the search for the equity of the assessment. Surely, all good citizens will join in the wish, that the trader may get the extra $20.00 out of his customers - if he can; that the farmer will remember that he owes the community $12.00, and will sell his produce in such a way as to cancel the debt; and that a purchaser may ultimately be found for the vacant land, who shall obtain it for improvement at a discount, equal to the $23.00 in taxes, annually remitted to the owner. In order to test, as best it can be done, the plan of the commissioners, a supposable case has necessarily been used; for in all their investigations, although they have found communities, as they suppose, with systems in some respects analagous to that which they propose, yet it can be safely asserted, that probably in no state or city in the world, certainly in none in America, can a community be found, which does not in some way or other draw a large percentage of its revenues from other sources than a direct tax upon real estate. To examine further, take the statistics of Boston, and see how the proposed methods would result in a city of a quarter of a million of inhabitants. And here, as actual valuations of the real and personal estates of citizens of Boston will be used, it is possible that, although names are omitted, the identity of persons may be discovered. It is therefore proper to say, that, although no figures will be used that are not by law open to public inspection, yet the examples taken to represent classes in the community have all been selected from among those citizens who have never appeared at the assessor's office with unreasonable complaints, or shown a disposition to escape their fair share of the public burdens. And first, using still the figures of the tax of 1870, let the rate of taxation in Boston be determined by the plan proposed. $213,862,775, the valuation of the land of Roston, reduced fifty per cent, is $106,931,388, to which add the full value of the buildings, $151,730,325, and the result is a total taxable valuation of $258,661,713, upon which to raise $8,636,862. The tax rate would be *$34.60 on each $1,000. This great increase of $19.30 on each one thousand of valuation, above the actual rate of taxation in Boston for that year, is occasioned by dropping, as required by the plan of the commissioners, $218,496,300 of personal property, and $106,931,388 of the real estate, a total of $325,427,688 from the total valuation of $584,089,400. Now, taking ten estates, selected because they are the homestead estates of men who may be fairly said to represent classes in the community, see the amount of tax paid by those estates in 1870, and what they would be required to pay under the proposed system. LOCATION. Area. Per cent of build ing to total value. Per cent of tax val ue to total value. Tax on full value at 15.30. Tax on reduced value at 34 60. 7,442 43,400| 27,200 70,600 38 21,700 3,900 25,500| 31,500 3,528 19,500 20,500 Commonwealth Av. 15,375 $92,000 $58,000 $150,000 32 $46,000 $104,000 69 $2,295 00 Beacon Street. 57,000 55 12,750 9,750 30.250 76 612 00 1.400 K Street 1,990 5,600 6.400 87 1,600 2,100 80 The irregularity of the areas contained in these several estates, breaks, in some measure, the regular progression of increase in the sixth column, where the percentage which the value of the building bears to the whole value of the estate, is shown. The table, however, demonstrates a fact long since generally known, that the more costly the land, the smaller the proportionate value of the building must be. The reason is, that it costs as much to build a house of given value on cheap laud, as on that * To all tax warrants, assessors in Massachusetts are allowed to add an amount not exceeding five per cent; for the purpose of avoiding fractional rates, and to allow for the shrinkage caused by necessary abatements. In casting the above rate, allowance was made for this "overlay"; and in future reference to the tax levy of Boston for 1870, the sum total of the list committed to the collector will be used; as, by those figures, the rate of the year, $15.30 on each $1,000, was fixed. which is more expensive. This is well illustrated by comparing the Florence, with the K street house, where, with only four hundred dollars difference in the value of the buildings, there is 15 per cent of difference in the proportion which the buildings bear to the estate. The ninth column shows the proportion of the estate retained for the purpose of assessment, under the proposed plan; and here, it will be perceived, that just in proportion as the land becomes less valuable, the larger the percentage that is held for taxation; while the thirteenth column demonstrates, that the effect of the great reduction of the taxable valuation has been, not only to increase the rate of assessment, but also, very largely, the tax upon all the estates, in a scale of progression that adds to the weight of taxation, in prɔportion to the inability of the owner to bear it. But, possibly, the observation will be made, that no system of taxation will find advocates, if, as the table shows, the taxes of all tax-payers are increased. That the table does not show. The taxes upon these estates have been made larger, but the effect of the two systems upon the owners, can be made more apparent in another statement. The ten estates used in these illustrations, are all homestead estates; and, with two exceptions only, the sole real estates assessed to the occupants in the city of Boston. In those two cases the next table will not show the tax upon the other real estate of the owners. But it is universally conceded of all real estate other than that occupied by the owner, that the tenant pays the taxes, either directly or in the form of rent. It is claimed that it is equally true, that all taxes upon personal property are paid by the consumer. This statement is not so universally admitted. It is somewhat like the broad proposition, that "all wealth is the product of labor," which may be quite true; yet few have seen persons in every community enjoying a large share of wealth with very little of exertion on their part, but have felt that this declaration of Adam Smith required explanation, at least, if not qualification. All readily admit, that |