Democratic Sentinel, Volume 15, Number 13, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 17 April 1891 — THE NEW REVENUE SYUEM. [ARTICLE]

THE NEW REVENUE SYUEM.

BOW IT WILL BENEFIT THE PEOPLE. A Fair Statement of the Principles and Provisions of the New Law—How It Will Benefit Honest Men and Particularly the Farmers— A Wise Measure. [“U. C.” in Princeton Democrat.] A knowledge of the law destroys mueh of it« supposed rigor and in justice. When a law is once enacted, the partisan press of the opposite political party exhausts all its energy in magnifying and flaunting its imperfections and in studiously and falsely concealing its virtues. This is strikingly illustrated by the conduct of the republican press in reference to the new assessment law in Indiana The tax payers are informed that the valuation of all property is to be more than doubled, and that hereafter taxes will, by reason of the new law, be enormously increased. In this talk about the burden put on the farmer and other tax payers, the republican press add to falsehood both insincerity and hypocrisy. Strange to say they find some people who believe these unwarranted inferences and statements to be true. Without examining the now law or comparing it with the ole., they at once ‘‘understand’* or “hear" the law to be “so and so” and jump at violent and unfounded conclusions. — “The farmers," says one prominent republican journal, “are quick to see that their taxes are just abcut doubled.” The vital change in the new law is in reference to the valuation of property.— When the sections of the old and the new law are placed side by'side they will be found to differ most in their resemblances. Sec. 48 of the acts of 1891, provides as follows: That the owner of the property shall fix what he deems the true cash value thereof to each item of property for the guidance of such assessor, who shall determine and settle the value of each item, after an examination of such statement and also an examination under oath of the party or any other person, if he deem it necessary. In determining or settling such valuation, he shall bo governed by what is the true cash value, such being the market or the usual selling price at the place where the property shall be at the time of its liability to assessment, and if there is no market value then the actual value. Sec. 6,330 of the revised statutes of 1881, in reference to the same subject is as follows: The owner shall affix what he deems the fair cash value thereof to each item of personal property for the guidance of the assessor, who shall determine the value of each item after examination of such statement, and also an examination of the party, under oath, if he deems it necessary. In determing and settling such valuation the assessor shall be governed by what is the fair cash value, such being the market or usual selling price at the place where the property shall be at the time of its liability to assessment, and if there be no market value then the actual value.

Sec. 95 of the act of 1891 provides: Lands and improvements and the buildings thereon or affixed thereto shall be valued at their full, true, cash value, estimated at the price they would bring at a fair, voluntary private sale, not at a forced or sheriff’s sale, taking into consideration the fertility of the soil, the vicinity of railroads macadamized roads, state or county roads, cities, towns, villages, navigable rivers, water privileges on tho same or in the vicinity of the same, the location of the route of any canal or canals, with any other local advantages of situation. See. 6,379 of revised statutes of 1881, on the same subject is as follows. Lands and improvements and the buildings or affixed thereto, shall be valued at their full cash value, estimated at the price they would bring at a fair voluntary sale taking into consideration the fertility of the soil, the vicinity of tho|sameto railroads, macadamized roads, clay rbads, gravel roads, turnpike roads, state or county roads, cities, towns, villages, navigable rivers, water privileges on the same or in the vicinity of the same, the location of the route of any eanal or canals with any other local advantages. Seo. 53 of the new act provides: The words “value,” “cash value,” “true value" or “valuation," whenever used in this act, shall be held to mean the usual selling price at the place where the property to which such term or terms.are applied shall be at the time of assessment, being the price which could be obtained therefor at private sale and not at forced or auction sale. The chief differences between the two in reference to the valation of personal property are, first, the old law provides that the owner shall fix a “fair” cash value and the new law, that he shall fix a “true cash value; and the second, the new law gives to the assessor the power to “examine under oath any other persons if he deem it necessary" to secure a true valuation. The words “fair" and “true" as used in the two acts are exactly synonymous—-

each meaning “the market or usual selling price at the place where the property shall be at the time of its liability for assessment." Setion fifty-three simply gives the words “tru* value," a meaning that “fair value" was always intended to have, and which, it always did have, and should have been given. “True value” in this section is defined as being the price which could be obtained therefor at a private sale and not at forced or auction sale.”— No one will contend that what an article will bring at a “forced or auction sale" is now or ever was its “true value.” The different sections define the two words and this definition fixes their meaning.— Both sections provide,that the valuation should be honest and fair. The new law adopts the theory that it is easier to determine what an item of property is worth than it is to guess at what it is not worth. Thus believing that it has determined what “true value” must mean. It has given a legislative definition to these words, and who doubts that it simply declares that to be the law that has always been the law. Fair|appraisement, under*the law as it was, grew to be a “custom more honored in the breach than the observance. ” The necessity of determining the valuation of Drop, erty by the oaths of persons other than the owner is evident. Assessors are only|human. No man can be found who has a knowledge of the value of all the diversified forms of the property in any community. Take an assessor who is a farmer and send him into a drug store, blacksmith shop or printing office, and what can he know of the value of the various articles. He is simply at the mercy of dishonest proprietors. Under the new law he can calf to his aid another druggist, blacksmith or editor who does know what the articles therein contained are worth, and this compels a true valuation. The necessity of this provision arises from the complexity of social affairs and industries and from the dishonesty of too many property owners. It is intended to thwart and foil the ingenuity of those who have hithertoescapedtheir just share of taxation. But the farmers are greatly excited over the valuation of land under the new law. And why? For the plain and simple reason that from time immemorial the valuation of land, even more than that of personal property, has been everything but “fair.” The statute of 1881 made it the duty of the assessor to val e real estate at its “full fair cash value, estimated at the price it would bring at a fair voluntary private sale.” The law of 1891 says the assessor shall value the land at its “full, true, cash value estimated at the price it would bring at a fair voluntary private sale, not at a forced or sheriff’s sale. ” In each law the same elements are pointed oat as those which shall be considered in fixing its value. The new law simply says to those who own the land: “You shall no longer be false and insincere in this ter. You must value your real estate at what it is worth and not at what you know it is not worth.” It is paradoxical to see a mtrohant injure hk storcho se for $5,000 and value it for taxation at SI,OOO. Yet such is common.— It is common to hear men talk of the sacrifice of property sold "under the hammer." Yet when the assessor calls these same men give “forced sale values" as “fair.” The law is a strong, sincere and just effort to compel every particle of wealth, in whatever form its owner may have clothed it, to bear its part of the burden of taxation. These are the only sections of the law that affect the agricultural people, and no farmer will complain of a law that compels exact and equal taxation. Other sections of the law, however, fairly bristle with penalties against concealment of property. The assessor is armed with unusual and extraordinary power to compel corporations—banks, railroads and insurance companies, etc., —to reveal their hidden riches and share with the farmer their just portion of thetaxation. If the assessor does his duty the operation of the law will inure to the benefit of the farmer. If he has not the courage and ability to execute the law the censure should fall on him. Many people are unduly and intensely excited and claim that taxes will be about doubled. This information comes from the same persons who knew the reforms of 1889 were all failures. Let us see how much of this is true and how much false. The taxable property of Gibsoa county last year was $10,111,925. The amount of taxes levied in the whole county, including delinquent, was $196,469.25, of this amoun' $23,085.96 was for state purpose. The balance was for the use of the county and the various townships and cities therein. This would show a necessary local tax, that is a tax for other than state purposes, of about 1.7 per cent, less than derived from pool tax and loss from delinquency. Now suppose the new assessment law doubles the valuation of property in the county—increases it say from $10,000,000 to $20,000,000. There is a certain amount of money needed for local purposes and the merest novice can see that as you inerease the valuation you decrease the rate. If you double the assessment you diminish the rate one-half. You decrease more even than this, for by reason of the new law, more than $2,000,000 of property that has never been taxed for any purposes will be compelled to bear its share of the county taxation.— Take for instance the single item of railroads. They are valued under the last assessment at $700,095 n this county. They could not be purchased for less than $1,500,000 and will if justly assessed of th mselves add an additional million almost to the valuation of Gibson county. For every dollar of tax paid in the county last year one" part went to the state and fourteen parts were used for local expenditure. If the new assessment decreases the county tax one fourteenth by reason of the taxation of propertv heretofore untaxed, this will equal the increased taxation for state purposes. Will it do it?— If it does not it will show one of two things to be true; either that assessors have been unable or untrue or that many many people heretofore unsparingly censured for the concealment of property are innocent. Last year the man whose property was valued at S4OO paid a state tax of 48 cents. Thit ye ir the same v aluation of property will pay the state $1.44. This is true of the theory that the assessment doubles the value of property. But, as heretofore shown, if the county tax is decreased onefourteenth the increased state tax will be exactly equaled. While it is no doubt true that the taxable property of the county will pay a larger amount of taxes under the new law than under the old, it , is equally true that the tangible and unconcealable property, that has hither,o

borne all the weight of taxation, will not pay a farthing more to the million than it paid under the old law. Under the new law Indiana’s valuation of property will reach near $2,000,000,000. With an 18 cents levy her state debt should rapidly melt away. Her additional revenue is a financial necessity and legislative ingenuity could not more happily devise the means of obtaining it. From the foundation of thq government to the present no patriotic citizen has ever murmured at a just and necessary tax however high. The social upheavals have been against unnecessary taxation. Indiana, even under the new law has a state taxation much lower than the vast majority of American commonwealths. That part of the state debt that the democratic party placed upon it is for the institutions of which everv citizen, when properly informed, ought in justice to feel proud.