Part 12

So thorough an experiment, carried through so long a time, and presenting an example to be avoided, was in fact imitated by Prussia under a law of 1865. In each division (_Kreis_) was appointed a commissioner, who was chairman of a committee, the size of which ranged from four to ten members, according to the size of the division. One half of this committee was appointed by the representatives of the division and one half by the central Government. A number of divisions formed a department, with its commissioner and committee of similar composition as in the division, and above all was a central committee, presided over by the Minister of Finance. The valuation was accomplished in less than four years. The method was applied only to land employed in agriculture or forests; a separate law provided for the taxation of buildings and gardens. In the end the results were no better than those obtained in France. In either case a plan too refined to work to advantage had been employed, and, apart from its simplest function, that of making a general survey of the land and the uses to which it was applied, it could not advance the theory of a proper land tax. No modification could make it a better instrument of taxation. The gross income from land as a taxing basis would involve heavy injustice, and further supervision by government officers could not do away with the mechanical difficulties of securing uniformity. The English plan of making rental value the foundation is more easily applied and gives better results.

If land be difficult of assessment, personal property offers a very much more difficult problem. On this particular question this country has much to learn from the experience of other governments. In Great Britain a Royal Commission has been making a study of local taxation, and, in a preliminary report, concludes that an alteration in the law for the purpose of obtaining a uniform basis of valuation in England and Wales is a necessary preliminary to any revision of the existing system of local taxation. It has been already stated that the poor rate constituted the basis of valuation of property for local rates. In its development the system has become more complicated. Two valuations of the same property may be made for raising imperial taxes--namely, one for the income tax, and one for the land tax. Three valuations of the same property may be made for raising local rates--namely, one for the poor rate, one for the county rate, and one for the borough rate. Here, then, are five different valuations in activity.

Of these the parish was the first and most important division, having been introduced in the sixteenth century, when the dissolution of the monasteries had raised the question of poor relief. It was adopted for convenience, as the contributions were at first entirely voluntary; but as the problem of the poor increased in importance, compulsion was applied, and at the beginning of the seventeenth century, by the acts of Elizabeth of 1597 and 1601, compulsion was fully established and the parish adopted as the area for levying rates for the relief of its poor. It now became necessary to define more specifically the persons liable for this rate, but the law framed no system by which assessments were to be made or rates collected. A distinction was made between the occupier of certain properties (such as lands, houses, coal mines, or salable underwoods) and an inhabitant of the parish. The occupier was to be taxed upon the basis of the annual benefit arising from the property situated in the parish; but the inhabitant was taxed not in respect to any specified subjects, implying an intention to tax them upon some other basis. This raised the question of "ability," and how that question was to be determined. The act said nothing that could point to personal property, "and it was only on the ground of his being an inhabitant that any owner of personal property could be rated for that property, because there was no word in that statute to include him, except the word inhabitant. Under that statute, therefore, there was necessarily a distinction between residents and nonresidents, because the resident would be ratable for his personalty within the place, the nonresident not. The distinction, however, under that statute applied only to those kinds of property which the statute did not specify, for the occupier of lands, houses, etc., and whatever the statute enumerated, was ratable whether he were resident or not."[55] And when the judge of assize was asked to give an opinion he decided that lands should be taxed equally and indifferently, but an additional tax could be laid on the "personal visible ability" of the parishioner. Further, "all things which are real, and a yearly revenue must be taxed to the poor." Yet there were limitations on this apparently wide interpretation, and as early as 1633 it was only visible properties, both real and personal, of the inhabitants within the parish, and only within the parish, that could be taxed. The property to be assessed must be local, visible, and productive; it must consist only of the surplus left after deducting debts; it must be rated according to the profit produced; and its nature must be distinctly specified. "Consequently, such subjects as wages, pensions, easements, profits derived from labor and talent, profits from money invested or lent elsewhere, and furniture, were exempt."

[Footnote 55: Abbott (Chief Justice) in R. _vs._ The Hull Dock Company, 3 B and C, p. 525.]

The absence of all attempts to tax or value property other than what was visible and tangible continued to the reign of Queen Anne, when a single decision of the court pointed to the taxation of the stock in trade of a tradesman, a decision that does not appear to have been acted upon. As late as 1775 Lord Mansfield said, "In general, I believe neither here nor in any other part of the kingdom is personal property taxed to the poor." At all events, it could not be taxed unless usage could support it. Toward the end of the century, when taxation for the Napoleonic wars was touching more intimately the concerns of the people, the idea of subjecting personal property to the poor rate was favored, but nearly half a century passed before it attracted attention. In their report for 1843 on local taxation the poor-law commissioners gave the following summary of the status of this question:

"The practice of rating stock in trade never prevailed in the greater part of England and Wales. It was, with comparatively few exceptions, confined to the old clothing districts of the south and west of England. It gained ground just as the stock of the wool staplers and clothiers increased, so as to make it an object with the farmers and other rate payers, who still constituted a majority in their parishes, to bring so considerable a property within the rate. They succeeded by degrees, and there followed upon their success a more improvident practice in giving relief than had ever prevailed before in England.... When the practice of rating stock in trade was fully established in this district, the ancient staple trade rapidly declined there and withdrew itself still more rapidly into the northern clothing districts, where no such burden was ever cast upon the trade."

A final determination of the question was imposed upon Parliament by the pressure of the manufacturing and commercial classes arising from a decision in the case of R. _vs._ Lumsdaine, in 1839, looking to the taxation of personal property. In consequence, an act was passed (3 and 4 Vict., c. 89), and has remained in force until the present time, exempting an inhabitant from any tax "in respect of his ability derived from the profits of stock in trade or any other property, for or toward the relief of the poor." Thus it is that the English local taxation has managed to keep clear from the bog of assessing personal property, and the annual value of immovable property, such as lands and houses, within the parish has come to be selected as the simplest and most practicable basis for assessments. The history is of high importance, because the basis of the poor rate was adopted as the basis for all other rates levied in local taxation. Whatever confusion has been introduced has arisen from other causes, such as the constituting poor-law unions containing more than one parish, the levying of county rates, a county having a boundary other than a parish or a union, and the assessing for rates by parish officers who acted independently of each other. Many efforts have been made to introduce a uniform system of assessment, but without success. One of the clearest thinkers on this subject was Sir George Cornewall Lewis. In appearing before a committee on taxation, in 1850, he said: "We have never recognized the principle of having one valuation for all the different rates. If that principle were once admitted, the inducement to have an accurate and complete valuation would be at its maximum, because then you would know that whatever charge might be imposed it would be imposed upon that valuation, whereas if there is one assessment for one rate and another assessment for another rate, and an amended assessment for a third rate, no one cares much about making any assessment perfect. This is one defect of the present system of valuation."

The defect has persisted and become more aggravated each year. In 1870 a special commission came to the resolution that "the great variety of rates levied by different authorities, even in the same area, on different assessments, with different deductions and by different collectors, has produced great confusion and expense; and that in any change of the law as regards local taxation, uniformity and simplicity of assessment and collection, as well as of economy of management, ought to be secured as far as possible." When it is considered that for the five independent valuations for raising rates on property there are in England and Wales more than one thousand valuation authorities, the hopelessness of obtaining uniformity is apparent. With such a multiplicity of agents it is useless to look for good results. There is no fixed or necessary time for making the valuation lists; no uniform system of or scale for making deductions for arriving at the ratable values of certain classes of property; exemptions and allowances are said to be given unduly, through undue pressure on the assessing authorities; and the assessment committees have no statutory power to ascertain from owners or occupiers the rentals and other particulars needed to determine values. The reforms needed are a geographical redistribution of taxing limits and uniform rules of assessments.

If so great confusion can occur where the property to be valued for taxation is visible and tangible property, and where the principles underlying the assessment are few and comparatively simple, what is to be expected when the attempt to reach invisible and intangible property is added?

Constitutional provisions have not secured equality of valuation, and the statute laws are powerless to make effective the sounding phrases of the Constitutions. "Property shall be assessed for taxes," says the Constitution of New Jersey, "under general laws and by uniform rules, according to true value." The Assembly sought to embody this principle or rule in the laws of the State. "All real and personal estate within this State, whether owned by individuals or corporations, shall be liable to taxation at the full and actual value thereof, on the day in each year when by law the assessment is to commence."[56] Such assertions of the basis of taxation need no further explanation, for the intention of the framers of constitution and law is unmistakable--equal and uniform taxation, a common burden involving a common obligation to discharge it. The practice at once creates the necessity for recognizing the inaptitude of the instruments called upon to carry the law into execution. More than four hundred separate assessors and boards of assessors determine the taxable values upon no uniform system and in defiance of law and Constitution. "In practice they value real estate all the way from twenty-five to seventy-five per cent of its true value, depending on its location, income, etc., and their personal or political prejudices, and value different contiguous areas at different valuations, though of equal values really; and as to personal property, I regret to say, they appear to make no earnest or honest effort to reach it anywhere, except in the agricultural districts, and even there very imperfectly."[57]

[Footnote 56: General Statutes of New Jersey, p. 3929, section 62.]

[Footnote 57: James F. Rusling, in the New Jersey report of 1897.]

Enough has been said in these articles to show that this defect of method is not peculiar to one State, but is to be found in all. The remedies proposed or adopted have proved ineffectual to produce a better result. It is asserted that the more careful selection of the assessors, a higher salary for service, and a more strict accountability for their acts would introduce a reform; but this could, even under the most favorable of conditions, be only a partial reform. A State assessor with power to remove the assessors has been recommended, but this officer could not become so conversant with conditions throughout the State as to be able to decide on the many questions of assessments coming before him. Certain descriptions of property could be dealt with by such an officer and with an approach to fair and equal treatment. The valuation of the "main stem" of the New Jersey roads was made by civil engineers, and it is believed to have met the constitutional provision as to "true value." In the valuation of a vast quantity of other property no such expert knowledge could be applied, and especially is this true as to "personal property." Real estate might be approximately valued and a _cadastre_ or record prepared, but after twelve months the most carefully compiled valuation would be out of date. Before personal property the assessor would still stand powerless. No multiplication of officers or no system of control over the many local assessors can solve this question in a manner satisfactory to justice to both State and taxpayer.

It would seem, then, as if an abandonment of what has been regarded as almost essential features of the State tax systems alone offers relief. No such abandonment can be effected unless an adequate revenue from other sources be provided. The "general property tax," with its futile and laughable incompetency to reach the most profitable sources of revenue, should be modified, and even eliminated as far as is possible. The general principle underlying it, of taxing every form of property, was suited only to a time when the bulk of a man's estate consisted in visible and tangible objects--lands, houses, live stock, and furniture. With every creation of a credit instrument, with the immense development of corporations, the principle has become weaker, until it now stands confessedly inapplicable to at least four fifths of the personal property in existence, and this proportion grows larger each year.

PHASES OF PRACTICAL PHILANTHROPY.

BY HARRIET A. TOWNSEND.

The annual reports of the "Conference of Charities and Corrections" indicate a growing interest in the study of scientific philanthropy. That there has been marvelous progress in methods of charitable work during the past decade no one will deny, but, gratifying as this is (or appears to be on the surface), we find a somewhat discouraging feature in the tendency of the present to multiply institutions, to inaugurate new and extravagant enterprises where theories may be proved, and which threaten to become burdensome to a generous public and to absorb energy in the financial struggle to maintain them which is sorely needed for the more vital issues of the work. The purpose of this article is to give information about simple and practical efforts which have met the test of usefulness and are worthy of imitation. They are being used in four different lines--namely, protection, education, domestic training, and employment.

PROTECTION.--The first protective agency was organized in New York city in 1864; it is truly an American idea, and before that date no organization of its kind had been known in England or on the European continent.

As a result of the civil war many women were thrown upon their own resources, with children to support, and much suffering was endured in the effort to obtain adequate compensation for labor performed. The objects of the parent protective association--"to secure justice for women and children, to give legal advice free of charge, and to extend moral support to the wronged and helpless"--appealed forcibly to practical philanthropists, and there now exist similar agencies in many other large cities in America, such as Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, Buffalo, and San Francisco. The women's educational and industrial unions, which work "to increase fellowship among women in order to promote the best practical methods for securing their educational, industrial, and social advancement," have all adopted the protective work as an important branch of their endeavor. To give detailed statistics of all that has been accomplished in this line since 1864 would be impossible; indeed, so much of the work is of a private nature which can never be revealed that one must "read between the lines" of the annual reports; suffice it to say that by the protective department of one women's union during a period of fourteen years more than twelve thousand dollars unjustly withheld from working women (mostly in small sums) has been collected, police matrons appointed in three local stations, women given places on public boards, a law passed compelling the appointment of women physicians in all the State insane hospitals, and a law making the guardianship of the mother equal to that of the father (passed by the State Legislature without a single negative vote). All this has been done with little expenditure of money, but through the wise effort of courageous men and women whose service has been rendered not for charity alone, but in the cause of justice, "that each should have what he has justly earned is the first necessity of social life."

One province of the protective work is to endeavor to make more clear the obligation of the employer and employee, and especially in the domain of household service to place the relation on a commercial basis. The problem of unskilled labor in the home is the principal difficulty in the way of such reform, and until the household economic and kindred associations shall bear more fruit it may prove an insurmountable barrier to complete success. During the last ten years the attention of the humanitarian has been frequently called to the injustice of our laws regulating the "age of consent." In some States the age has been raised to sixteen or eighteen years and penalties increased, but through widespread ignorance of the law it is often a dead letter in both small towns and large cities. A law so constantly broken and with impunity provides little protection for the young of both sexes, in whose interest it is framed, and it is a _dead_ letter because of the indifference of the public. To spread abroad a knowledge of and help to enforce these laws, which so intimately affect the purity of the home, is worthy the consecrated effort of the noblest and most cultivated women in our land. For this and other like ends the number of protective agencies should be largely increased. In every town, or at least in every county, such an association might be formed. There are only required a few women with brave hearts and clear heads, willing to give one afternoon or evening a week, the free services of one or more able lawyers (which will never be found lacking), a small room for a meeting place, and the work can begin. Let notice be given through the press or in the churches that a protective agency is formed and stands ready to offer sympathy and advice to all women in need. Methods of work are very simple: printed blanks are important to properly record the cases, and letterheads which shall give names of committee and those of the attorneys; when a claim for wages is presented, a courteous letter stating the fact that the wage-earner has asked the assistance of the protective agency, and requesting the defendant to answer personally or by letter and to state his side of the case, will generally receive response; great care must be observed to be just to both parties, and not to make hasty nor unwarrantable decisions.

The laws affecting the rights and property of women of New York have been briefly compiled for the use of protective associations, and it is very easy to obtain in any State a copy of the laws regulating domestic service for reference in making decisions. The Legal Status of Women, compiled by Jessie J. Cassidy (a graduate of Cornell), will be found useful. If in the beginning the work of protection should be misunderstood and resented it matters not; in time it will win the respect and co-operation of the best elements in any community. What a moral force would an "endless chain" of such workers prove in the struggle for universal brotherhood! To give courage to the most humble beginning we have the word of our philosopher that "every reform was once a private opinion."

DOMESTIC TRAINING.--Scientific domestic training or household science is becoming a subject of great interest to all who believe that a truer development of home life lies at the foundation of all social and moral progress.

Three large institutions--Pratt, of Brooklyn; Drexel, of Philadelphia; and the College of Teachers, in New York city--present opportunities for the thorough training of teachers in this comparatively new branch of popular education.

Clubs for the study of household economics are multiplying year by year; the Association of Collegiate Alumnæ has given earnest thought to the domestic problem, and as a result, and in spite of much prejudice, courses of cookery have been made a part of the public-school curriculum in a few of our large cities. The Board of Regents of New York State has recently adopted a syllabus for a course in home science to be used in the high schools. While the movement, as yet, may be said to be in the experimental stage, it is safe to assert that sentiment in favor of the new idea is increasing. The difficulties in the way of a rapid growth are formidable and make the outlook somewhat discouraging.

To properly equip a school for scientific domestic training is in the beginning a considerable expense; the number of skilled teachers ready for the field is small, and their services too valuable to be given without adequate compensation. The cooking schools so far established have not proved self-sustaining, and until more sensible ideas as to the dignity of household labor shall prevail, limitations will continue.