n* 
 
 f THE 
 
 liwfVFRsiry of Illinois 
 F EB 1915 
 
 Extracts from Messages and Addresses 
 of Governors of Virginia 
 Regarding Taxation 
 
 1893-1914 
 
 
 COMPILED BY 
 
 LEWIS H. MACHEN 
 
 DIRECTOR OF 
 
 THE LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE BUREAU 
 OF VIRGINIA 
 
 RICHMOND: 
 
 DAVI8 BOTTOM, SUPERINTENDENT PUBLIC PRINTING 
 
 1915 
 
3 3 k ■ K 
 
 U gl3fc- 
 
 Extract from the Inaugural Address of Governor Henry C. 
 • ~ Stuart, February 2,1914 
 
 V — 
 
 u. The functions of government are misapplied unless there is 
 ^produced approximate equality in the distribution of burdens and 
 ,H benefits. That no such equality is incident to our present system 
 of taxation is perfectly obvious. Discriminations are flagrant and 
 should be removed with as little delay as possible, llie task is diffi¬ 
 cult, but is not, for that reason, to be postponed or slighted. No 
 more important task is assigned to those to whom the people must 
 look for the correction of the evils of a system which exacts from 
 some much more than they should fairly pay, and from others cor¬ 
 respondingly less. 
 
 The present rate of State taxation on all classes of property, 
 real and personal, is equal and uniform, and existing discrimina¬ 
 tions must, therefore, arise from the non-assessment, or under¬ 
 assessment, or over-assessment of property. Accordingly, I think 
 it is clear that the initial step in tax reform‘is to put under actual 
 contribution every kind and description of property not exempt by 
 law, and thus so broaden the base of taxation as that the common 
 burden may rest lightly on all. 
 
 Real estate is assessed at intervals of five years by assessors 
 appointed by the courts, many of the counties being divided into 
 two or more assessment districts. Personal property is assessed 
 every year by commissioners of the revenue elected by the peo¬ 
 ple, and in some counties there are half a dozen or more districts, 
 each having a commissioner. There is no adequate provision for 
 local equalization, and gross inequalities frequently obtain in the 
 valuation of both realty and personalty in the different assessment 
 districts of the same county. Likewise there is no provision for 
 State equalization, and just as gross inequalities obtain affecting 
 counties and cities, and the various sections in their relation to each 
 . other. All of this occasions no surprise, when it is considered that 
 the duty of making the assessments is performed by hundreds of indi- 
 vidual officials who do not act in concert, and each of whom, so far at 
 least as the assessment of real estate is concerned, has no other guide 
 than his own judgment as to what is a fair market value. The 
 S woeful lack of uniformity which prevails, with consequent wide¬ 
 spread injustice and complaint, is inevitable under such a system. 
 
 For the purpose of remedying a system which is confessedly 
 and glaringly defective, equalization is a fundamental necessity. 
 The difficulties of equalization become more apparent when we con¬ 
 sider carefully the facts to which the present inequality is largelv 
 
 ' [ 3 ] 
 
due. A tax rate which is made abnormally high by the under¬ 
 assessment of visible property becomes unjust when it is applied 
 to intangible property, which in most cases is assessed at its par or 
 face value, and in any case by easily ascertained standard of value. 
 Under these conditions the owner of intangible property seeks re¬ 
 lief from what he considers a disproportionate burden by failing 
 or refusing to report his property for assessment and taxation. 
 The owner of real estate and visible property accepts with com¬ 
 placency the benefits of under-assessment of his own property, in 
 the full knowledge that a large percentage of intangible property 
 is not assessed at all. A just scheme of equalization must, there¬ 
 fore, deal at one and the same time with property under-assessed 
 and with property, the bulk of which is not assessed at all. On 
 any other principle the process of equalization might, and most 
 certainly would, result in large increases in assessments of prop¬ 
 erty that could not from its nature go into hiding, such as real 
 estate, without bringing into contribution any fair proportion of 
 intangible property, thus aggravating, rather than relieving, exist¬ 
 ing inequalities. 
 
 Assuming that a body could be created with powers sufficiently 
 broad and comprehensive to deal justly with the situation as it is 
 presented, I would suggest tentatively local boards of equalization 
 for counties and cities, to insure uniformity of assessments in every 
 county or city for State and local taxation, and a State l)oard of 
 equalization, composed of a representative of each grand division 
 of the State, and charged with the supervision of all assessments 
 made by the local boards, and given authority to equalize assess¬ 
 ment values, so as to prevent any inequality from which otherwise 
 any section, county or city might suffer. The assessment of all 
 property would be within the jurisdiction of these boards, except 
 that belonging to public-service corporations, which is assessed by 
 the State Corporation Commission. 
 
 I quite understand that equalization is one thing, and that it 
 is another thing to discover and place under contribution property 
 which is intangible. Equality of assessment and equality of rate 
 would be incomplete as between different classes of property, with¬ 
 out equality of accessibility. While I appreciate the difficulty of 
 fully reaching for taxation this class of property, I do not con¬ 
 cur in the view that it should be singled out for preference or favor, 
 and I will never agree that visible real and personal property shall 
 be made to bear a disproportion of the burdens of government. On 
 the other hand, I am firmly of the opinion that intangibles should 
 be expected and compelled to pay their proper share of the revenue 
 required for the support of the government. T, therefore, favor such 
 practical and reasonable measures as will tend to give the assessor 
 
 [ 4 ] 
 
and tax gatherer the same access to intangibles that he now has to 
 property which is visible. Of course, intangibles should not be 
 made to pay more than a proper share, and, therefore, if it can 
 be assumed that visible property will always be assessed at some¬ 
 thing less than its actual value, the legislation for the modifi¬ 
 cation of our system might provide a maximum rate for the taxation 
 of intangibles, the actual value of which is easily ascertained, 
 whether for State or local purposes, leaving any deviation from 
 that rate to a lower rate, with a view to preventing discrimination 
 against the owners of intangible property, to the discretion of the 
 State board, which would have the most intimate and detailed 
 knowledge of the entire subject. 
 
 The annual addition to the total revenue of the State should 
 be strictly limited, so that the rate of taxation would automatically 
 fall with the inevitable increase of assessed values. Such a limita¬ 
 tion with reference to revenue for the use of any county or city 
 is something that can be safely left to the action of the local au¬ 
 thorities. 
 
 A plan of equalization conceived and executed as I have in¬ 
 dicated, would, in my opinion, reduce to a minimum and distribute 
 as evenly as possible the necessary burdens on all tax-payers. The 
 rate of taxation on all classes of property w 7 ould then be low enough 
 to satisfy any patriotic citizen who recognizes the fact that one 
 dollar in every seven we collect goes to the discharge of an ante- 
 bellum debt. Exemptions and abnormally low rates are onlv pos¬ 
 sible in States which are not only out of debt, but which have large 
 fixed sources of revenue independent of that derived by direct 
 taxation of the citizen. 
 
 The co-operation of the Corporation Commission, whose duty 
 it is to assess the property of public-service corporations, is, of course, 
 essential to the accomplishment of any desired reform. I may as 
 well say in this connection that, in dealing with public service cor¬ 
 porations, I favor a policy which, while vigorous and unyielding in 
 the enforcement of the rights of the public as to service, facilities 
 and charges therefor, will be equally so in the protection of the 
 corporations from undue burdens and exactions. 
 
 If it should be found impossible to devise any effective plan of 
 tax reform involving equalization and at the same time guarding 
 the owners of the several classes of property against discrimination, 
 there should be legislation providing for such segregation of the 
 subjects of taxation as the constitution contemplates, so framed as 
 to give compensation to counties and cities surrendering an undue 
 share of the taxable values on which they subsist and upon which 
 have been predicated their obligations. Segregation is the only 
 alternative to the plan tentatively suggested, and of which T have 
 undertaken to give only the barest outline. 
 
 [ 5 ] 
 
Extract from the Message of Governor William Hodges Mann, 
 
 January 14, 1914 
 
 The people of Virginia demand, I think wisely, the passage 
 of such laws for the taxation of real and personal property, whether 
 tangible or intangible, which will compel each citizen to contribute 
 his or her share of the money needed by the State for the protection 
 of the rights of persons and property, for the care of the unfortu¬ 
 nates who are unable to care for themselves, and which will make 
 Virginia progressive and put it abreast of the States having the 
 wisest laws on this important subject. 
 
 Having been a member of the tax commission under the acc 
 approved March 14, 1910, and having given a great deal of thought 
 to the subject before and since the report of the commission to the 
 General Assembly of 1912, I desire to submit certain suggestions 
 and recommendations for your consideration, and I trust, for your 
 approval. 
 
 I approached this subject in 1910 with the conviction that 
 there must be either segregation, or an equalization of assessment 
 in the different counties and cities of the State, and I then strongly 
 favored segregation. This, of course, would have made equalization 
 unnecessary, but would not have done away with the necessity for 
 a fair assessment of the property of our citizens, as such a valuation 
 largely determines the wealth and the relative influence and im¬ 
 portance of our State. After a careful examination of the resources 
 of the State and its political subdivisions, while a member of the 
 Tax Commission and since it ceased to exist, and especially in 
 the light of a plan submitted by the fiscal officer of the State, as 
 much interested in and just as desirous of reaching a proper solu¬ 
 tion of the tax problem as I am, the conclusion has been reached 
 that no plan of segregation is workable which makes the income 
 of the State, or any considerable part of it, depend upon a per 
 centum tax to be paid by counties and cities on property, the 
 valuation of which is wholly under the control and powder of the 
 counties and cities. Such a plan, even with an honest desire on the 
 part of the cities and counties, which I, of course, assume, could 
 not result in an equal assessment, as there would be no controlling 
 or supervising tribunal familiar with general conditions and charged 
 with the duty of equalization. And as it is admitted that the plan 
 above mentioned would require this per centum, my contention, if 
 correct, would seem to dispose of it. 
 
 The fundamental principle of taxation is equality. It should 
 Q | not be said that each citizen must bear his share of the public 
 
 [ 6 ] 
 
burden, but that each should contribute his share to the expense 
 of government, which, if properly administered, is not a burden but 
 a protection, a benefit and a blessing. 
 
 To secure, therefore, this fundamental, fair and equal valuation, 
 which shall at once fix the amount of the citizen’s contribution to 
 the government and determine the wealth and largely the influence 
 and power of the State, I recommend that three discreet men be 
 appointed from each congressional district to assess and determine 
 the average value of the real and tangible personal estate in the 
 several counties and cities in the district. In fixing the value of 
 the real estate the clerk of each county should be required to 
 make out a list of the sales of the land in his county for the pre¬ 
 ceding year, giving the number of acres and price, and upon this 
 information and such other as could be procured as a basis, and 
 taking into consideration the mountain, swamp and other waste 
 land, the average value per acre of the land in the several counties 
 should be determined. This plan is not applicable to real estate in 
 cities and towns, the valuation and equalization of which must 
 be left to the discretion of the commissioners. And upon such 
 information as the commissioners in the several districts could se¬ 
 cure by personal visits, from conference with commissioners of 
 the revenue and leading business men and farmers, and from other 
 sources, the fair average selling value of all animals, vehicles and 
 other tangible personal property in counties and cities should be 
 fixed, and a report made showing said values. When the reports 
 from all the districts shall be ready, a commission of ten, to be 
 known as the General Tax Commission, composed of one man from 
 each congressional district commission, designated by the appoint¬ 
 ing power, should meet in Richmond, or other convenient place, 
 to consider the reports of the several congressional commissions, 
 which would, as soon as completed, be delivered to the several mem¬ 
 bers of the congressional commissions constituting the general tax 
 commissions, who, with the aid of the Auditor of Public Accounts, 
 to be ex-officio member of the commission, should at once, and 
 bringing to their aid all possible information, go over the said re¬ 
 ports and ascertain the fair average selling value of all the real 
 and tangible property in the counties of the several districts, and 
 the aggregate value of the real estate in the cities and towns, of the 
 State, and determine the same according to the provisions of the 
 Constitution. The General Tax Commission should embody its 
 findings in a report, the original of which, with the reports of the 
 congressional commissions, should be filed with the Auditor of Pub¬ 
 lic Accounts, and a copy of the general report filed with the clerk 
 
 [ 7 ] 
 
of the circuit court of every county and the corporation court of 
 every city in the State. 
 
 Within three months from the filing of the said copies any 
 ten tax-payers of any county or city should have the right to file with 
 the clerk in whose office the copy of the report is filed, a written 
 application for appeal from the valuations made, serving upon the 
 attorney for the Commonwealth of the county or city a copy of 
 said application at least fifteen days before the term of the court 
 or the day of such term fixed in the application for the trial of 
 the appeal. 
 
 At the trial of said appeal the attorney for the Commonwealth 
 should he required to defend the application, and the Attorney- 
 General, or his assistant, whenever deemed necessary by the Attor¬ 
 ney-General, or required by the General Tax Commission, should 
 appear with the attorney for the Commonwealth of the county or 
 city. The appeal should be tried without other pleading than the 
 application and the answer filed by the Commonwealth’s Attorney 
 and Attorney-General or his assistant, in cases in which either 
 shall appear, upon such evidence as may be produced by either 
 party, and the report be confirmed or the average or aggregate values 
 be lowered or raised by the court according to the right of the 
 case. From the decision of the circuit court or corporation court 
 the applicants or the Commonwealth should have the right of 
 appeal, within thirty days, to the Supreme Court of Appeals, upon 
 the evidence submitted to the trial court, which should be taken 
 down and certified by the trial judge as in other cases. And upon 
 such appeal the Supreme Court of Appeals shall have jurisdiction 
 to try the case and enter such order confirming the report as made 
 or lowering or raising values as may seem to it just and right, and 
 its decision shall be final as to such values, except improvements 
 may be added each year as now provided for, until the next regular 
 legal assessment. Every such appeal shall be put on the privilege 
 docket of the court, shall be heard and disposed of as speedily 
 as may be, at the next term of the court after the appeal wherever 
 the court may convene and without regard for the locality from 
 which the appeal comes. 
 
 After the average value of the land and tangible personal prop¬ 
 erty shall have been fixed as aforesaid, or after the right of appeal 
 shall have expired, the assessment of the several tracts of land 
 and tangible personal property shall be made as now provided 
 by law, so that the average value per acre of land and the average 
 value of the tangible personal property as fixed by the reports or 
 as determined bv the courts shall be maintained. 
 
 After the valuations have all been made, if it shall appear to 
 the Auditor of Public Accounts that the revenue of the State at the 
 
 [ 8 ] 
 
rate of taxation fixed by law will exceed by more than two hundred 
 and fifty thousand dollars, which is about the natural yearly in¬ 
 crease on account of improvements of real estate, the receipts for 
 the last fiscal year, the Auditor of Public Accounts, the Second 
 Auditor and the Treasurer should be constituted a commission 
 to lower the rate of taxation, having due regard to the amount re¬ 
 quired by the Constitution for public schools., so as to provide 
 a revenue adequate to the needs of the State, but not to exceed 
 for general purposes by more than two hundred and fifty thousand 
 dollars the amount collected the previous year, unless necessary to 
 meet the appropriations made by the Genera] Assembly. 
 
 It is believed that a law such as has been suggested will con¬ 
 siderably reduce the tax rate and cure in an equitable way, the 
 principal defects in our tax laws, and that the last provision will 
 do away with the need of an extra session of the Legislature, the 
 expense of which will more than cover the expense of the tax com¬ 
 missions. 
 
 It should be understood that the powers, duties and compen¬ 
 sations of the congressional district commissions will expire when 
 the assessments made by them shall be reported to the General Tax 
 Commission, and that the powers, duties and compensation of the 
 General Tax Commission shall expire whenever the reports of all 
 the cities and counties shall have been made to the Auditor of 
 Public Accounts and passed upon by the General Commission and 
 the courts, or the time for appeal shall have expired. 
 
 After the aforesaid assessment has been made, I recommend 
 the appointment of a permanent tax commission, which shall be 
 charged with the duties of equalizing assessments and generally 
 supervising all the officers charged with the duties of assessing and 
 collecting taxes, and also charged with the power and duty of re¬ 
 porting for removal to the circuit judge, of the county or the cor¬ 
 poration court of the city, any of the local officers who shall fail 
 to discharge their duties. Upon such report the judge or court 
 should cause reasonable notice to be given to the officer reported, 
 and upon its return should try the complaint, and if sustained should 
 remove the officer and appoint his successor. 
 
 As a matter of pressing need and in the best interest of the 
 Commonwealth, I recommend the immediate passage of an act, 
 with an emergency clause, putting a nominal tax on bank deposits 
 in place of the present law. If this is not done before the com¬ 
 mencement of the tax year, the withdrawal of such deposits may 
 cripple the banks, and, through them, materially interfere with 
 the business of the State. Such a law will, in my opinion, bring 
 money to our State, and contribute to its prosperity. But a. bet¬ 
 ter reason for a nominal tax on this kind of property is that almost 
 
 [ 9 ] 
 
always the deposits come from stocks, bonds or other property 
 taxed, or constitutes a part of income also taxed, and is simply 
 placed in bank for safety and convenience until paid out into 
 the ordinary course of business. The present tax is, therefore, un¬ 
 just. 
 
 In this connection, however, and inasmuch as there might be 
 book changes of bonds, notes, taxable stock, and other evidences 
 of debt, into bank deposits in order to evade the payment of tax, 
 such transfers or any pretended purchase of n on-taxable securities, 
 or purchase to evade the tax laws should be made a misdemeanor 
 and upon conviction the offendor should pay a fine equal to five 
 times the amount of tax he endeavored to save, and should also 
 be required to pay the said tax. 
 
 I renew my recommendation that a small rate, not to exceed 
 fifty cents on the hundred dollars, of which thirty cents should go 
 to the county or city and twenty cents to the State, be placed upon 
 all intangible personal property and be the only tax, either State 
 or local, to be assessed on this class of property. Where this plan 
 has been tried, as in Maryland and other States, it has worked 
 well and added largely to the revenue received from intangible 
 personal property. 
 
 All persons, corporations and firms paying taxes on incomes 
 to the Federal government should be required to furnish the com¬ 
 missioner of his county or city with a copy of his assessment and 
 the Auditor of Public Accounts should have prepared and furnish 
 to all tax-pavers on request blank forms corresponding with those 
 furnished by the officers of the general government. 
 
 It might be well to change the method of taxing public service 
 corporations, but this is a matter which can wait until others more 
 important have been passed upon. 
 
 In view of their present condition, I recommend the appoint¬ 
 ment of a commission to consist of a lawyer, the Auditor of Public 
 Accounts and a commissioner or ex-commissioner of the revenue, 
 whose duty it shall be as soon as the tax policy of the State is 
 fixed to carefully go over, revise and codify the tax laws of the 
 State, and report to the next General Assembly. 
 
 It is sincerely hoped that the recommendations of this mes¬ 
 sage may meet with favorable consideration from the General 
 Assembly. - 
 
 Message of Governor William Hodges Mann, January 11, 1912 
 
 Herewith I transmit to the Assembly the report of the Special 
 Tax Commission appointed under provisions of chapter 147, Acts 
 of 1910. 
 
 In forwarding this report I wish to call attention to the im¬ 
 portance of the work undertaken by this Commission and to a 
 
 [ 10 ] 
 
few of the results which may be expected to follow the adoption 
 of its recommendations. 
 
 Heretofore there has been little system in the collection of the 
 public revenue. As occasion has demanded and as new revenue 
 was required, our tax laws have been changed from time to time; 
 new taxes have been added; new sources of revenue have been 
 discovered; class taxes have been increased. But there has been 
 no general policy pursued in these extensions of our revenue laws 
 and there has been no consistent plan developed. As a result our 
 laws are at present in great confusion; many taxes are unduly 
 heavy in comparison with others; in some instances double taxes 
 have been levied; the whole code is chaotic, confused and unsatis¬ 
 factory. Moreover, this careless treatment of our tax laws has been 
 responsible for many of the financial difficulties under which the 
 Treasury of the Commonwealth has labored during recent years. 
 Our laws have been so uncertain in their operation and so con¬ 
 flicting in their character that it has been impossible to estimate 
 with any degree of accuracy the probable receipts of the State. 
 
 In addition, our tax laws have fallen into public disrepute. 
 Our people have realized the condition of our code and have felt 
 that our laws were unjust and discriminating in character; un¬ 
 reasonable and unweildly in practice. There is a widespread, in¬ 
 deed a State-wide clamor for a comprehensive and thorough re¬ 
 vision of our assessment laws. 
 
 It was to meet this iust demand and correct these deplorable 
 conditions that the Assembly created a special Tax Commission 
 at its last session. This Commission, of which I have had the 
 honor to be chairman, has endeavored to discharge its duties in a 
 full appreciation of the importance of the work undertaken, and in 
 an earnest desire to give to the Assembly recommendations which 
 would make possible a general and satisfactory revision of the 
 law. 
 
 I unhesitatingly recommend the finished work of the Commis¬ 
 sion to the favorable consideration of the General Assembly, and 
 believe that its adoption at the present session of your honorable 
 body will be at once a great contribution to the welfare of the 
 people and a marked step toward the establishment of a stable 
 equilibrium in the financial affairs of the Commonwealth. 
 
 I wish especially to emphasize the recommendation of the 
 Commission for the creation of a permanent tax commission, which 
 shall have power to equalize assessments. The recommendation 
 the Commission regards as fundamental. Heretofore we have had 
 no central administration in matters of taxation and have left to 
 local officers, responsible to the local electorate, the collection of 
 about 40 per cent, of the revenue of the Commonwealth. The 
 
 [111 
 
 re- 
 
suit lias been a disregard for the interests of the State and an in¬ 
 equality in matters of taxation, which is not creditable to the good 
 name of Virginia. The Commission made an exhaustive exami¬ 
 nation of the systems of equalization in use in other States and 
 reached the conclusion that a system of horizontal equalization, such 
 as is recommended in the report, was the only system feasible at 
 this time. If the plan proposed by the Commission be enacted 
 into law, the Commonwealth, at small cost, can secure the equali¬ 
 zation of real and personal property assessments and can give to 
 every citizen the assurance that he is paying in the same manner, 
 at the same rate and on the same basis as other citizens. I believe 
 no plan can be found more productive of good, and requiring so 
 small an outlay of public funds, as that proposed by the Com¬ 
 mission. ' 
 
 The restoration of equality in taxation will make possible a 
 speedy reduction in the rate of the State tax. Of this there can 
 be no doubt. That such a reduction is highly desirable and is due 
 the tax-pavers of the State, I need not point out to the Assembly. 
 A tax rate of twenty cents on the hundred dollars valuation is 
 easily possible, and will mean new immigration and additional 
 capital to the Commonwealth and new prosperity for our people 
 
 I wish to impress upon the Assembly the importance of im 
 mediate favorable action upon this report. Only by prompt enact¬ 
 ment can the Assembly hope to see the benefits of the new plan 
 of assessment during the present year. A few weeks delay will 
 prevent the assessment of personal property during the present year 
 under the plan proposed and will thus deprive the Commonwealth 
 of revenue properly due, while it will postpone the date at which 
 a reduction in the tax rate will be possible. 
 
 I regard this subject as of paramount importance. Nothing 
 more vitally affecting the interests of the people or more intimately 
 connected with their daily life can be made the subject of legal 
 enactment. The recommendations of the Commission, which I re¬ 
 gard as well-digested and most feasible, should receive prompt ap¬ 
 proval, and I trust will be adopted as a whole, leaving to experience 
 the discovery of and the remedy for any defects which may ap¬ 
 pear. 
 
 It is but just to add that the information contained in the 
 report of Dr. Douglas S. Freeman, Secretary of the Commission, 
 will be found of the greatest value. He has carefully examined and 
 digested the tax laws of most of the States of the Union, culled 
 from them their most valuable features, and drawn his own con¬ 
 clusions, which are very clearly presented. Dr. Freeman has made 
 himself familiar with conditions in Virginia, and his report and 
 tables will enable the General Assembly to act quickly and in- 
 
 [ 12 ] 
 
telligentlv on the bill to carry into effect the recommendations of 
 the Special Tax Commission. 
 
 I think it well in this connection to call attention to certain 
 congruous matters, which, while not within the jurisdiction of the 
 Special Tax Commission, should at this session receive the attention 
 of the General Assembly. 
 
 N”ow that the treasurers of the counties are permitted by law to 
 succeed themselves, the cause of the adoption of the Constitutional 
 provision, which still exists, should be removed by legislation. 
 
 There is no way by which a settlement can he made with the 
 county treasurer for county and school funds. It is true that a 
 settlement can be made and a balance due by the treasury ascer¬ 
 tained, but as his is the only hand authorized to receive the money, 
 there can be no actual payment or settlement. I, therefore, recom¬ 
 mend that the treasurer he required at the July or August meet¬ 
 ing of the board of supervisors of his county, as the case may be, 
 or within sixty days thereafter, to settle his accounts with the 
 supervisors for that year as required by section 862 of the Code. 
 And that he be required at its August meeting in each year to 
 settle with the county school hoard, which settlement should be 
 made before the commissioner of accounts of his county, or if from 
 any cause he cannot act, before some competent person appointed 
 by the judge of the circuit court of the county, who shall he en¬ 
 titled to a reasonable fee out of the fund. And if a balance shall 
 be found to be due by the treasurer it shall be at once deposited 
 in some bank to he selected by the board of supervisors, if county 
 funds, to the credit of said board, and bv the county school board, 
 if school funds, to the credit of the said board, the money due to 
 be drawn by warrants authorized by the hoard of supervisors, 
 signed by its chairman and counter-signed by the treasurer, and 
 the school funds by warrants authorized by the county school 
 board, signed by the division superintendent and counter-signed 
 by the treasurer. 
 
 It is also recommended that the county treasurer be required 
 under penalty to make these annual settlements. 
 
 In this connection it may be proper to add, that no suffi¬ 
 cient provision exists for the collection of delinquent taxes, which 
 now amount to a very large sum of money due to the State and the 
 counties and cities. It is, therefore, recommended that an act be 
 passed requiring the clerk of every city and county to place all 
 the delinquent tax tickets lodged in his office in the hands of the 
 county and city treasurers, listing the same and taking the treas¬ 
 urer’s receipt therefor, and for which adequate compensation to 
 the clerks should be allowed. The treasurer should be required to 
 add the amount of such delinquent taxes, by years and amounts, 
 
 [ 13 ] 
 
to current tax tickets, so that the last ticket will contain the entire 
 claim of the State against the tax-payer for taxes., which should he 
 lien on all his personal property as an execution now is and on 
 his real estate as delinquent taxes now is. 
 
 Provision should he made for the forwarding of tax tickets 
 to place of residence of a tax-payer who removed from the county 
 or city in which he is assessed before payment, and the clerk should 
 be required to keep in an alphabetically arranged record book a 
 list of the delinquent taxes which are liens on real estate, but the 
 purchaser of land should not be required to look back of or be 
 responsible for any taxes not on the last tax ticket. 
 
 The county treasurers are now required by law T to make monthly 
 settlements with the Auditor of Public Accounts, thus simplifying 
 their transactions with the State and saving possible loss by failure 
 of banks or other causes, and this rule should be made to apply to 
 clerk of courts, now required to settle only twice a year, and to 
 all other officers collecting money for the State. Frequent settle¬ 
 ments are best for the officers and the State. 
 
 The recommendations of this message are earnestly commended 
 to the favorable consideration of the General Assembly. 
 
 Message of Governor William Hodges Mann, March 9, 1910. 
 
 “The failure of Senate bill No. 71 in the House on yesterday 
 requires me to call the attention of the General Assembly to the im¬ 
 perative need of some method for the equalization of taxes in the 
 State. Unless a plan having this end in view is adopted at this 
 session of the Legislature, the greatest inequality will exist, and 
 the greatest injustice will result to those sections in which assessors 
 following the rule established by the Constitution assess the land 
 in their respective districts at its fair market value. Under the 
 Constitution the assessment of this year will be the basis of taxation 
 until 1916, and the importance of having a uniform assessment 
 throughout the State can not be over estimated. 
 
 “At this late day of the session it may not be possible to adopt 
 the wisest measure of equalization, but as our finances will be 
 affected for five years and our plans of progress halted, I am confi¬ 
 dent that the wisdom and the patriotism of the General Assembly 
 is equal to the emergency, and that a measure will be adopted which 
 will result in great good, even if it does not perfectly meet with the 
 views of all of the people’s representatives. 
 
 “We are all interested in the welfare and progress of the State, 
 and all working together for the advancement of her best interests, 
 
 [ 14 ] 
 
and I anl sure that by making natural concessions, and bv giving 
 and taking help, one from another, a law may be passed which will 
 be just to land owners and meet the requirements of the State.” 
 
 Extracts From The Message of Governor Claude A. Swanson, 
 
 January 12, 1910. 
 
 For the purpose of State taxation there exists a great lack of 
 uniformity in this Commonwealth. Glaring inequalities present 
 themselves in the assessment upon both real and personal property. 
 Counties, cities and sections, in making assessments of property for 
 taxation, adopt widely different proportions of cash value. Some 
 assess a fair cash value, others three-fourths of the cash value, others 
 one-half of the cash value and some less and some more than this 
 proportion. This lack of uniformity occasions a great injustice and 
 unfairness in the payment of State taxes, and should he promptly 
 and efficiently corrected. There should exist a State authority em¬ 
 powered to remedy these evils and to distribute equally the burdens 
 of State taxation. Under the present system values are assessed 
 entirely by local authorities, and the State has no power to make 
 corrections, even when the injustice is gross and apparent. Com¬ 
 munities can and many do now escape a fair share of their taxation 
 by low assessments. Others realizing the extent of this practice and 
 seeking to remedy the injustice, adopt themselves very low valua¬ 
 tions. These conditions should not continue. 
 
 After considering maturely the many plans proposed, I have 
 concluded that the State can in a very simple, direct and efficient 
 way correct this ‘great evil. Under the present law copies of the 
 books of the commissioners of revenue, containing the yearly assess¬ 
 ments of personal property, and copies of the books of the land 
 assessors, containing the assessment of real estate, are sent to the 
 Auditor. From these are estimated the taxes due the State, by 
 city and county treasurers. If a law should be passed, requiring 
 these assessments to have the approval of the State Auditor before 
 they become operative, the existing inequality and injustice could 
 be substantially corrected. The Auditor could determine a uniform 
 proportion of cash value of property, real and personal, to be as¬ 
 sessed for the purpose of State taxation; when this rate of uniform 
 valuation was violated by a commissioner of the revenue or land 
 assessor, so that he could not approve the books, then the Auditor 
 should be directed to send the books back for correction, and if 
 not properly corrected or returned within a certain time the Auditor 
 
 [ 15 ] 
 
should be authorized to make the assessment for State taxes, the 
 same to be as effective as if made by the commissioner of revenue 
 or land assessor, with the privilege of persons, feeling themselves 
 aggrieved, having the same corrected in the court of the county or 
 city where the property is located, precisely as under the present 
 law. 
 
 I believe this would be very effective and would produce sub¬ 
 stantial uniformity within the State. An examination of present 
 inequalities clearly disclose that they consist not of inequalities 
 among individuals in the same county, city or section, but of in¬ 
 equalities in fixing the proportion of cash value in the different 
 counties, cities and sections. This would be eliminated by the 
 Auditor enforcing a uniform percentage of cash valuation for the 
 entire State. The very fact that the Auditor would have to approve 
 the assessments would induce the officers to make them just, fair 
 and reasonable. I believe this would be so effective in producing 
 the desired results that the authority of the Auditor would have to 
 be very rarely invoked. 
 
 One of the advantages of this proposed plan is that it utilizes 
 one of our best organized and most experienced and capable depart¬ 
 ments of State government. A department which has long had suc¬ 
 cessful control of such matters and which by providing for a small 
 increase of force could most effectively and satisfactorily do this 
 work. It would save the State the uncertainty and the great expense 
 always incident to the creation of a new department. It would leave 
 to local officials the performance of this work, as now exists, pro¬ 
 vided they did it fairly and well. Before exercising the State power 
 the local authorities would be given the opportunity to correct anv 
 inequalities. Persons aggrieved by State assessments could obtain 
 relief promptly in their home courts. This proposed plan has the 
 advantage of being simple, direct, inexpensive, and would be admin¬ 
 istered by tried and trained officials. Much of the information 
 needed already exists in the Auditor’s office. ITe would be as capable 
 as any of employing when needed, competent assistants. If enacted, 
 I believe the good results achieved would promptly and completely 
 vindicate its effectiveness in producing uniformity of taxation, and 
 obtaining for the State much revenue, of which she is now unjustly 
 deprived. As the time is near approaching when there will be a re¬ 
 assessment of real estate, which will be the basis of taxation for the 
 five succeeding years, I wish to urge upon the General Assembly the 
 imperative necessity of legislating upon this matter at this session. 
 
 There exists in this State a great need for a well-equipped ac¬ 
 counting department. All the different departments of the execu¬ 
 tive government, all the various State institutions, should be required 
 to settle annually with this department and have their books and 
 
 [ 16 ] 
 
accounts completely examined. It should be directed when necessary 
 to yisit and examine the accounts and books of persons and officials 
 indebted to the State, and see that their accounts are properly kept. 
 And that the amounts due the State are fully and promptly paid. It 
 should he authorized to prepare a proper and scientific system of 
 bookkeeping for the various State departments and institutions. This 
 department could be most beneficially utilized by the Governor in 
 making examinations of the condition of institutions, which are 
 placed by law under his supervision. Its services would also be 
 invaluable to the joint auditing committee of the House and Senate. 
 
 There is much other important work that readily suggests itself 
 that this department could successfully do. I would recommend that 
 it be organized with an accountant and an assistant, and a reason¬ 
 able appropriation for traveling and contingent expenses. If it should 
 be disclosed that a larger force is necessary to do the work promptly 
 and efficiently, this can be provided in the future. Tt is wise and 
 economical to create departments to do the immediate pressing work, 
 and let them increase in proportion and in the direction that expe¬ 
 rience shows is best and most needed. The savings and benefits that 
 would inevitably come to the State from this source would far excee 
 the small expenditure required. 
 
 Extract from the Message of Governor A. J. Montague, 
 
 January 13, 1904. 
 
 The new sources of our taxation distinctly contribute to the 
 adjustment of the burdens of government. The increased revenue 
 derived from corporate property is very gratifying. The equalizing 
 of taxation has become an almost insuperable difficulty; but it may 
 be affirmed that if all people and interests share equally the burdens 
 of government our tax rate could be greatly reduced. As an indica¬ 
 tion of the benefits of the new system, it should be observed that 
 though as yet but partially tested, and at a reduced rate, our present 
 revenue from assessments made by the Corporation Commission 
 alone will exceed that of last year bv about four hundred and thirty- 
 eight thousand dollars. Our income, in round numbers, will approx¬ 
 imate four millions of dollars per annum, thus demonstrating the 
 ability of the commonwealth to meet every obligation, and to pro¬ 
 vide for improved administration in many departments. Yet af 
 no time should the legislature more determinedly practice economy 
 than when a full treasury tempts expenditure. 
 
 While taxation is a source of unending controversies in gov¬ 
 ernment, it must be conceded that the lower the rate, consistent 
 
 [171 
 
with efficient administration, the less the burdens of the people. 
 Therefore, it is needful that the State expeditiously proceed in the 
 enlargement of the sinking fund. Every bond purchased saves in¬ 
 terest and thereby an equivalent expenditure. State bonds to the 
 amount of $1,111,500 are now impounded in this fund. These 
 bonds cannot be cancelled because there is no authority therefor. 
 I would therefore suggest the enactment of a provision for the can¬ 
 cellation of all present and future holdings until they are reduced 
 to a balance not exceeding $300,000 at any one time. This latter 
 sum is an ample reserve for a sale or hypothecation if public exegen- 
 cies so require; a larger sum invites extravagance. 
 
 The Constitution provides that “no money shall be paid out of 
 the State treasury except in pursuance of appropriations made by 
 law; and no such appropriation shall be made which is payable more 
 than two years after the end of the session of the general assembly 
 at which the law is enacted authorizing the same;” and this pro¬ 
 vision brings us face to face with a danger pointed out in my last 
 message. The appropriation act expired on September 30th last, 
 and from that date to this hour the disbursements for the support 
 of the government have been in plain violation of the law. The 
 government should not be thus forced by methods so unnecessary 
 and illegal, and I am therefore constrained to repeat my former 
 recommendation for a change of date of the term for which appro¬ 
 priations should commence, thus affording a remedy at once simple 
 and complete. 
 
 Extracts From Message of Governor A. J. Montague, 
 January 10, 1906. 
 
 The State should create one special accountant, to inspect and 
 scrutinize as far as possible the accounts, vouchers and methods of 
 bookkeeping of all officials at the seat of government and elsewhere 
 in the State, who collect, account for or pay out public moneys. 
 Such an accountant, if selected solely for his experience and capacity, 
 could hardly perform all of the duties which would devolve upon 
 him, but we could at least make a beginning of a work so much 
 needed. 
 
 Efficient officials would desire the approval and inefficient offi¬ 
 cials would fear the disappoval of this accountant, the public profit¬ 
 ing in either event by the examination. This system obtains in the 
 United States government, and perhaps, in some of the States of the 
 Union, and has been satisfactory wherever tried. 
 
 The assessment of revenues is a delicate and difficult task under 
 
any form of government; but manifestly the simplest machinery 
 for this work is preferable. Some years since the State created offi¬ 
 cials called examiners of record, and one of whom in each judicial 
 circuit must make assessments of all moneys, bonds, notes, stocks 
 and every species of personal property under the control of the court, 
 as well as of all watercraft over five tons burden. After making 
 these valuations the examiners of record report them to the com¬ 
 missioners of revnue, who make extensions thereof upon their books, 
 the State paving commissions to both sets of officials. There is 
 hardly any class of property less difficult to reach and assess than 
 that in question, and the fact that the State should have paid to these 
 examiners of record alone the large sum of one hundred and eighty- 
 two thousand, seven hundred and seventy dollars ($182,770.67), 
 and sixty- seven cents in the past ten years for work which could 
 have been done by the commissioners of revenue, who are also paid 
 the regular fees for extending these valuations, is a great wrong 
 upon her tax-payers. I, therefore, advise the abolition of this new 
 and unnecessary office and the reimposition of its duties upon the 
 commissioners of revenue with rigid accountability of service. 
 
 Comprehensive civil service regulations authorized by statute 
 and applicable in the appointment and retention of all clerks in the 
 offices of the treasury department would be a beneficial achieve¬ 
 ment. The conduct of this business should be analogous to that of 
 safe and sound banking institutions. A system of civil service 
 should also be extended to all employes of the penitentiary and in¬ 
 sane hospitals, other than their respective superintendents and assist¬ 
 ants, and to the police, janitors, conductors of elevators, and machin¬ 
 ists employed in the seat of government. The selection of these 
 officials, as well as their tenure of office, should be determined wholly 
 by efficiency and character and removed entirely from the suspicion 
 of political considerations.” 
 
 Extract from the Message of Governor J. Hoge Tyler, 
 January 1, 1902. 
 
 The proper exercise of the taxing power of a government has 
 always been the most difficult of all its functions. Aside from the 
 many problems connected with a proper adjustment of the laws of 
 a State where the population is composed of citizens who are en¬ 
 gaged in a variety of trades and business, great difficulty has always 
 been experienced in having the laws enforced so they will bear 
 on all the citizens even in the manner contemplated by their framers. 
 No more important question can be called to your consideration 
 than the laying of the taxes of the Commonwealth. This is the vital 
 and sensitive question which puts to the test your sense of justice, 
 
 [ 19 ] 
 
and calls into play a wise and equitable provision for the support 
 of the government. It is the question above all others that has 
 caused the dissensions and wars of the world, and has been used 
 as an engine of oppression and favoritism wherever the races of 
 men have been least enlightened. Unjust taxation is the very em¬ 
 bodiment of tyranny, while just and proportionate taxation is the 
 product of the highest Christian civilization. I beg of you to ap¬ 
 proach this subject not lightly nor indifferently. 
 
 One fruitful source of inequality is the collection of taxes from 
 what may be called “invisible property.” From the very nature 
 of this class of property the collection of the just and proper tax 
 is largely dependent on the honesty of the citizen, and where this 
 is not present can only be effectively reached by the enactment of 
 such drastic laws that the honest citizen rebels against their enforce¬ 
 ment. It is true that some men, otherwise honest and correct, seek 
 to justify their evasion of this duty to their State on the ground 
 of the low rate of interest derived from their securities and the 
 high rate of taxes imposed for State and municipal purposes, and 
 also in some instances because it represents some visible property 
 which has already been taxed. There is no question but that 
 those men who belong to the second class mentioned have grounds 
 for their complaint, and it is the duty of the law-making branch 
 of the government to hear their complaints and grant such relief as 
 can be given, and after this has been done the position that they 
 then might take for evasion would be dishonest and untenable. This 
 is especially just, because the holders of lands and other visible 
 property have no redress, even though their property does not yield 
 sufficient income , to meet the taxes levied, and in consequence they 
 seek, or are charged with seeking, to evade the taxes imposed on 
 them by resorting to means to have them assessed below their true 
 value. I mean to make no invidious comparison against the holders 
 of “invisible” property in favor of the owners of “visible,” for 
 human nature is not changed by the character of the property owned. 
 It is due to the increased opportunities afforded the holders of in¬ 
 visible property that a larger number of this class evade their just 
 taxation. This is evidenced by the great discrepancy between the 
 amount of “invisible property” returned for taxation as compared 
 with the amount of “visible.” How to adjust these inequalities is 
 indeed a problem, and while this is a subject that naturally has 
 received the attention of the Constitutional Convention, and in 
 consequence leaves it open so far as legislative action is concerned, 
 still as they will necessarily leave a large discretion to the Legisla¬ 
 ture, I deem it not inappropriate to bring this matter to your atten¬ 
 tion. 
 
 Another most perplexing question ever disturbing legislative 
 
 [ 20 ] 
 
bodies is the inequality of land assessments. This is largely due 
 to the fact that the assessment is made for the whole State, by men 
 of each county, who, even though they were perfectly impartial in 
 their judgment, would be more or less influenced by the different 
 views which they take of the desirability of a high assessment and 
 a low tax, or a low assessment and a high tax. To meet this con¬ 
 dition, or at least to remove it as a source of justification for the 
 holders of “invisible” property for failure to return their property, 
 in my opinion it would be best, when the constitutional restrictions 
 are removed, for the Legislature to arrange for sufficient revenue 
 to be derived from other sources, as I believe it can be, to meet the 
 expenses of government, and cease to tax real estate for State pur¬ 
 poses, and leave this class of property to counties and cities in which 
 they are situated as the sources from which to derive their revenue. 
 In this way alone I believe the question of adjusting the inequalities 
 of assessment which now exists in different portions of the State 
 may be remedied. The reasons for the desirability of this change are 
 so manifest that they need hardly be stated. In the first place, even 
 though it left the lands unequally assessed in the different coun¬ 
 ties of the State, as they are now, still it would remove all grounds 
 of complaint on this score because the revenues of the State would 
 be in no way affected. 
 
 There are other reasons of great force that can be urged in 
 favor of this system; among them might be stated that it would 
 cause the real estate to be assessed at an amount nearer its true 
 value in all the counties and cities of the State. 
 
 While on this subject of taxation attention is naturally drawn 
 to that imposed on the railroads and other corporations of the State, 
 for while all good citizens recognize the great public benefits de¬ 
 rived from the encouragement and development of their railroads 
 and other corporations, and no one in the State is more willing 
 than myself to lend them every assistance to promote their welfare, 
 yet experience has demonstrated that by reason of the great power 
 that they have the capacity to exercise in the political affairs of 
 the country, there is a danger of a constant tendency on their part 
 to avoid their just proportion of the burdens of government. They 
 enjoy great privileges and possess rights not common to the in¬ 
 dividual citizen, and in consequence should be required to return 
 to the State a just share of the expenses of government, based on 
 the value of their property as well as on the value of the franchise 
 or privileges that has been given them by the State. 
 
Extract from Inaugural Address of Governor Charles T. 
 O’Ferrall, January 1, 1894. 
 
 Taxes imposed upon the people, whether directly or indirectly, 
 should he limited strictly to the necessary demands of the govern¬ 
 ment, economically and prudently administered, and when levied 
 for any other purpose, or in a spirit of profligacy or extravagance, 
 it is robbery under the forms of law. Excessive taxation, s ft ffi ktg 
 t^io s ubstance of -~the-people, except to supply the real wants of the 
 government, whether done by State or national authority, is a 
 crime—a crime .against^ the^Constitution^ State .or- federal, against 
 right, against honesty, against conscience, against every home, every 
 fireside, and every man, whatever he his vocation. Of course, it 
 bears most heavily upon the laboring man, for often at best his 
 struggle is hard to keep the w T olf from his door, and besides when 
 the vrages of the wage earner is withdrawn from him, general stag¬ 
 nation and depression follow^ just as the draining of the blood from 
 the human body brings the chill and paralysis of death. 
 
 The State debt, with its Pandora’s box of evils has fortunately 
 been adjusted upon terms acceptable to the creditors and honorable 
 to the State, and never again will it return to plague us or to 
 threaten us with the increased burdens or the diversion from their 
 rightful channel of the revenues intended for the education of the 
 children of the State. 
 
 In my opinion the present rate of taxation upon property can 
 soon he reduced. The rapid advancement of values in many direc¬ 
 tions, the great strides we are making in our material development, 
 the blaze of industries lighting up our gorges, the hum of machinery 
 and the lumberman’s axe, breaking the stillness of our primeval 
 forests and craggy recesses, the miners pick unearthing the black 
 diamond and jetty coal vein, the whistle of the locomotive convert¬ 
 ing quiet and gloom into life and cheerfulness, all open up before 
 us a prospect so bright that, taken in connection with important 
 reforms and reductions which have been proposed, leads me to hope 
 and believe that before the close of the next four years the condition 
 of our treasury will justify the legislature in lessening the rate of 
 taxation upon real estate and personal property with advantage to 
 the taxpayer and without injury to any interest, keeping faith with 
 our creditors and meeting promptly all our obligations. 
 
Special Message of Governor P. W. McKinney, 
 December 12, 1893. 
 
 Taxation . 
 
 There is no subject of legislation more difficult to adjust than 
 taxation. There is no debt due by the citizen which he pays with 
 such reluctance,, and there is no duty which he will endeavor to 
 avoid like the payment of taxes to the government. He seems to 
 forget that life would be at the mercy of the murderer, and property 
 would be but a prize to him who would take it, but for the protection 
 which the government affords. Without it life would be so uncer¬ 
 tain, and property so insecure, that they would be burdens, not bless¬ 
 ings. It is strange that when demand is made for taxes necessary to 
 support the government, which protects both life and property, the 
 citizen will so often place obstructions in the way of their collection, 
 and pay the assessments against him with a protest. 
 
 Hothing which a legislative body does is examined so closely 
 and occasions so much criticism as a tax bill. To take what is neces¬ 
 sary for the general good, that which belongs to the individual, is 
 one of the prerogatives of a sovereign State, and however just it 
 may be, often leaves in the mind of the citizen a disagreeable feeling 
 that he has been robbed of what belongs to himself, for the benefil 
 of others. * This has been a prolific cause of dispute between the peo¬ 
 ple and the government in most of their controversies, and often 
 causes the downfall of parties. It is prudent, therefore, not to lose 
 sight of these facts, but require that the laws which relate to the as¬ 
 sessment and collection of taxes should be often reviewed, so that all 
 injustice may be promptly corrected, and no real cause of complaint 
 be allowed to remain uninvestigated. 
 
 Our Constitution declares that “all property, both real and 
 personal/ 7 shall be taxed in proportion to its value. “Ho one species 
 of property shall be taxed more than any other species of equal 
 value, and the value shall be ascertained as prescribed by law. 77 
 (See Constitution of Virginia, article X., section 1.) 
 
 How is the Amount and Value of Real Property to be Ascertained f 
 
 To ascertain the amount is easy enough; the county records 
 will show the amount of the real estate subject to taxation. To 
 ascertain the value is difficult. The Constitution declares that the 
 value is to be ascertained as prescribed by law. The statute (Code 
 of Virginia, section 44, page 87) declares that the assessor shall 
 “examine, ascertain, and assess the cash value thereof. 77 ITow do 
 
 [ 23 ] 
 
you ascertain the cash value? There is no rule laid down for his 
 guidance in this delicate and difficult duty. Each assessor exer¬ 
 cises his own judgment as to the proper manner of ascertaining 
 the values in the various counties and cities in the Commonwealth. 
 It must necessarily he tilled with errors, with the usual differences 
 of. opinion which attend all questions submitted to so many dif¬ 
 ferent officials, all at liberty to select their own grounds for the 
 basis of their judgment, and it is, therefore, impossible that the 
 assessment could be uniform and just. One will say that the cash 
 value should he determined by what the property will bring on 
 the market for cash. How could that be an unerring test, when, 
 perhaps, the property has not been sold for many years, and various 
 changes may have taken place seriously affecting its value ? Another 
 may say that a better way to ascertain the value according to the 
 income derived from it. This also would often be inaccurate, be¬ 
 cause it would necessarily depend on the industry, intelligence and 
 business habits of the owner. The same property under the man¬ 
 agement of one person might return a handsome remuneration, 
 wffiile in the hands of another bring its owner into debt. It is diffi¬ 
 cult to prescribe a rule which will always be correct. At the last 
 assessment, in 1890, there was considerable change in the value of 
 real estate in various portions of the State, which has occasioned 
 comment, and some uneasiness as to the result of the next assess¬ 
 ment, in 1895. If the parts of the State which did not reduce their 
 assessments shall undertake to reduce them then, as some did in 
 1890, it may make an increase of the rate of taxation necessary. 
 These are some of the difficulties of properly ascertaining the value 
 of real estate. 
 
 How It Should Be Assessed. 
 
 Property ought to be assessed at its selling value at volun¬ 
 tary sale, not at forced sale or auction sale, and not for cash. Who 
 sells real estate in that way ? To sell for cash is to sacrifice by sell¬ 
 ing at much less than its real value, when the Constitution says no 
 land shall he assessed above or below its value. When an officer 
 begins to speculate as to what real estate would bring in the market 
 in this unusual mode of selling, it is guessing at what should be 
 a stern reality. IIow much land is there in Virginia which could 
 not be sold at any price for cash! How little there is which could 
 he sold for even a fair price for cash ? Shall all this be relieved 
 from taxation, which has no cash value? The statute should be 
 changed in this respect, and the assessment should be tested by what 
 the property would bring sold in the usual way, and upon the usual 
 terms for selling real estate in the particular locality in which it is 
 
situated. In some places property is assessed at two-thirds of its 
 value. If this was uniformly done there would be no injustice in 
 this reduction; but this is not the case. The assessor having aban¬ 
 doned the standard required by the law, is without guide, and sub¬ 
 ject to the passions of the importunate tax payer, who all the time 
 will pull downward. The desire of each locality to avoid the pay¬ 
 ment of an undue proportion of the State tax is sufficient to explain 
 the tendency to low assessments. 
 
 How to Arrest This Alleged Inaccuracy in Assessments. 
 
 There are various suggestions. One is to have a hoard of equali¬ 
 zation to take the values from various parts of the State and change 
 them in such a way as to more fully carry out the provisions of the 
 Constitution, which declares that real estate shall not be assessed at 
 more or less than its fair value. This suggestion carries with it 
 the censure of the county officials, whose duty it is to make the 
 assessments, and implies that assessors from other parts of the State 
 could be better relied on for a true valuation than those immedi¬ 
 ately interested. This has been tried in New York and several 
 other States. To avoid injustice, it has been proposed as a remedy, 
 to give over to the counties for taxation for county purposes the 
 real estate, and let the State take all other subjects of taxation for 
 the support of the government. Then each county may assess such 
 a value on its real estate as it desires, and thus the State will avoid 
 this difficult and delicate question of equalization. 
 
 Another suggestion is for the legislature to assess counties ac¬ 
 cording to population and the value of their property, and let each 
 county raise the money by a tax imposed on that property which 
 can best hear it, and which will he less burdensome to its people. 
 These suggestions show the difficulty which surrounds this entire 
 question. The legislature should consider it deliberately, and adopt 
 a remedy. 
 
 To Ascertain the Amount of Personal Property. 
 
 This is also difficult, because it is so easily concealed. It is 
 less difficult, however, to ascertain its value when discovered, than 
 real estate, because it so frequently changes hands by sale or ex¬ 
 change, and this can he used as a fair criterion for the ascertain¬ 
 ment of its value. 
 
 To Ascertain the Value of Personal Property. 
 
 This also puzzles legislators. Different plans have been tried 
 in various States and countries. It would make this message tec 
 
long for me to discuss all the devices used. It is estimated by those 
 best informed on the subject that on a fair assessment of all the 
 personal property it would he about equal in value to real property. 
 This proposition has been discussed, and the fact admitted by a 
 number of the governors of the State, in their messages, and by 
 many of the best writers upon this subject. One of them says, “It 
 is reasonable to believe, if our present tax laws were reformed and 
 placed on some true and consistent theory, the assessment of per¬ 
 sonal property will nearly equal the assessment of the realty, and 
 thereby the present unjust burdens on real estate would be greatly 
 reduced.” 
 
 The assessors in Hew York recently reported to the legislature 
 that personal property is assessed at an average of less than 10 per 
 cent, of its nominal value, and that the value of personal propertv 
 in the State of Hew York equals, if it does not exceed the value of 
 the real estate. 
 
 If the tax valuation of personal property of the whole country 
 were to be consulted for the purpose of ascertaining its financial 
 condition, it would be found to he rapidly rushing towards bank¬ 
 ruptcy. From 1870 to 1880 the census returns show that the as¬ 
 sessed valuation of the personal property of the United States de¬ 
 creased one million and a quarter, and from 1880 to 1890 the de¬ 
 crease was even greater ; the real estate increasing during the same 
 period more than five billions, while the fact is conceded that the 
 value of real estate and personal property increases, as a rule, pari 
 passu. This apparent declination in the value of personal estate 
 is due to defective assessments—the officers not being able to find 
 what is the amount and value of investments made in stocks, bonds, 
 notes, etc., and in invisible property of various kinds. This decline 
 seems to be generally admitted to he apparent and not real. 
 
 How, so defective is our law, and so badly is it executed, that 
 the real estate is assessed (February 1, 1892,) at $300,717,366, 
 and the personal property (February 1, 1892,) at $95,868,081. Real 
 estate pays $1,206,500 of the tax, and personal property pays 
 $384,011, because of the failure to obtain the true amount and value 
 of the personal property in the State. Many have favored relieving 
 personal property from taxation because of this difficulty. This 
 should not be done, because it is rewarding the dishonesty of the 
 tax-payer who fails to give in a true list of his property; it is doing- 
 just what he is striving for—to-wit, the release of what he owns 
 from bearing a just proportion of the public burden. If this was 
 done, a difficulty equally as great would at once be encountered 
 in assessing satisfactorily the value of real estate, when heavily in¬ 
 creased burdens shall be placed upon it to compensate for the loss 
 to the State in releasing personal property from taxation. 
 
 [ 26 ] 
 
Taxation of Incomes. 
 
 After a reasonable tax has been imposed on real estate and 
 personal property there should be a fair tax placed on incomes. 
 This will be a varying tax, dependent upon the success of the peo¬ 
 ple in their business during the year. Income tax will vary, be¬ 
 cause it depends on business success. It should be used to meet 
 the deficiency in the amount of taxes necessary for government 
 purposes, after a reasonable tax on property has been assessed. It 
 is said by some that taxes should only be assessed on visible prop¬ 
 erty; that to tax incomes, which are invisible, must be unjust, be¬ 
 cause you cannot correctly assess what you have not seen. To ex¬ 
 amine into what a man has makes it inquisitorial, therefore both 
 unpopular and improper. This, I think, is a grave mistake. It 
 ip. not unpopular, but is growing in favor, and is urged by a large 
 proportion of the people. It is becoming a source of revenue in 
 many of the States, and has been for years used as a means of 
 revenue in England and other countries in Europe. In 1842 it 
 was adopted in England as a temporary measure to relieve trade 
 and commerce from the trammels by which they were bound. It 
 was imposed for four years, but. so well did it serve the purpose of 
 revenue that the government, after a fair trial, finally determined 
 to keep it as a permanent part of the English financial system. 
 To assess it, was, for a time, the cause of trouble and complaint, 
 but experience has enabled the officers to ascertain this source of 
 revenue with as near an approximation to justice as any other. It 
 is unpopular with a certain class of people who desire to avoid a 
 fair proportion of the burdens of government by investing their 
 means in a way to escape taxation more readily than they could 
 if invested in visible property. This is unjust to property owners. 
 The capitalists whose wealth consists of invisible property are as 
 much benefited by the government in being protected, thus enabling 
 them to make their incomes, and in their enjoyment of them, as 
 those who own visible property, which cannot escape the attention 
 of the assessors. Their investments in property not taxable by the 
 State, because they cannot be ascertained, prevent, investments in 
 visible property which can be easily discovered, and thus the de¬ 
 cline from year to year of this kind of property. It cannot be 
 fairly denied that no tax is so just. The only trouble is the diffi¬ 
 culty in properly fixing the amount of the income. Certainly the 
 good citizen who is willing to bear his proportion of the taxes does 
 not complain. He is willing to give a fair statement of what he 
 owns for assessment. The man who complains is the one who will 
 resist a fair assessment of his income. He ought not to be re- 
 
 127 ] 
 
garded, because he enjoys the blessings of the government, and is 
 unwilling to bear the burdens which are imposed on other citizens. 
 I trust this class is neither numerous nor influential in the Com¬ 
 monwealth. The property tax is often a hard one; it is inexorable. 
 It must be paid whether the property has yielded revenue to its 
 owner or not. It is often the case that the merchant pays his taxes, 
 which he could not anticipate, have overtaken him after his assess¬ 
 ment has been made, and when the tax-gatherer comes he pays his 
 dues out of an almost empty cash drawer. The farmer, whose 
 property was assessed years before, it may be, has sustained a 
 heavy loss, occasioned by the act of God, which he could not have 
 anticipated nor provided against—in the way of a drought or 
 storm—the result of which was not only the loss of his income 
 from his yearly work, but creates a debt for the labor, and the ex¬ 
 pense of cultivating his land, and which he has no means to pay, 
 except by involving both his real and personal estate, and yet his 
 taxes are not abated, and he must meet them. It is often merciless. 
 It exacts as much in the year of disaster to the citizen, who is 
 struggling to keep his head above water, as in a year of unmeasured 
 prosperity, whereas the income tax only exacts much when fortune 
 has been kind, and has blessed him with a bounteous hand. It im¬ 
 poses heavy burdens only on strong shoulders; where it can be borne 
 without a struggle, and it should be received without a murmur. 
 It is, in my judgment, the fairest tax ever devised. The possession 
 of large property does not always imply an ability to pay heavy 
 taxes. The amount of taxes should generally be governed by the 
 income derived, even when assessed on property values. The in¬ 
 come tax spares the business man in seasons of disaster, and helps 
 him to weather the storm, but asks a return for the consideration 
 shown in days of increasing prosperity. It is not unjust or unwise 
 to exact a fair tax from every citizen. It has a tendency to make 
 him feel an interest in the government. He looks after the men 
 who make its laws; he does not become indifferent, as they do who 
 feel that their prosperity is of such a character that the law can¬ 
 not affect it, and do not care whether the tax is high or low. In all 
 places where the intelligent and the virtuous citizens take no in¬ 
 terest in government, there will be unwise legislation and unjust 
 laws; so form your laws as to make all feel an interest, and the 
 vigilance of the people will then require wise legislation and just 
 enforcement. 
 
 Is An Income Tax Inquisitorial? 
 
 How can you find out ivhat a man has for taxation without in¬ 
 quiry ? How would you know what to tax the merchant, the lawyer, 
 the physician, the distiller ? The tariff is inquisitorial, too. When 
 a citizen returns home from abroad his baggage is searched. Skilled 
 
 [ 28 ] 
 
detectives, male and female, are in the custom house to open the 
 trunks of all, and even examine their persons, fearing that some¬ 
 thing may escape being taxed, but no one urges this as any objec¬ 
 tion to the tariff. Hogs, horses, cattle, household and kitchen fur¬ 
 niture, are all taxed according to their value. How can you dis¬ 
 cover the property and ascertain its value, except by inquiry? If 
 you were to release from taxation all property which could not he 
 discovered, except by diligent inquiry, I fear the revenues of the 
 State would soon fall far short of the demands upon its resources. 
 
 How Should Income Be Ascertainedf 
 
 This is a matter which must be diligently inquired into, and 
 a law should be framed after the results and experiences in other 
 States and countries have been carefully examined. There are 
 many modes of discovering incomes. One is to make an examina¬ 
 tion of the tax-payer under oath, and not to allow a man to make 
 his own assessment. Some of the States require the oath of the 
 officer to each assessment. Another plan is to allow the officer to 
 make assessments, and if the tax-payer is not satisfied, he can appeal, 
 and show the assessment is erroneous. Another is to have a special 
 grand jury examine and say what would be a fair assesment of the, 
 income of each man who excepts to the assessment made by the 
 officer. 
 
 The difficulty has been exaggerated, and the failure to get a 
 correct return is due in a great part to the negligence of the com¬ 
 missioner of the revenue, and if some penalty was attached to his 
 failure to do his duty, commensurate with the importance of the 
 subject, I am sure that the increase of revenue from this source 
 would he great. 
 
 o 
 
 Corporations. 
 
 Corporations, as well as individuals, should pay a fair income 
 tax, and when a reasonably graded income tax has been required 
 of all, it would not he heavy for those who have it to pay, and yet 
 it would relieve people and property of an onerous burden. Some, 
 complaining of taxes, say they are too high. This complaint is not 
 unreasonable in many cases. Many tax-payers surrender to the 
 officer all of their property with a fair valuation imposed upon it. 
 To such it is a burden, because they pay more than a fair share, 
 as so much property goes untaxed, and some not sufficiently taxed; 
 hut a fair assessment upon all will lighten the burden and make 
 the tax easy. This is what I am laboring for; it will make the 
 people contented, and their burdens equal and light. We have in 
 
 [ 29 ] 
 
 4 
 
this State enough wealth, if fairly assessed, to reduce greatly the 
 rate of taxation, and with a conservative and economical adminis¬ 
 tration of the affairs of the State, have all the means we need to 
 support the schools and colleges, to pay the expenses of government 
 and the interest on the public debt; and to give a reasonable pension 
 to every one of our disabled soldiers. But to do this you must reach 
 the untaxed—because undiscovered—resources of the State, and see 
 to it that a fair assessment is placed upon their values, and your tax, 
 from being among the highest imposed in any of the States, may 
 be reduced to about the lowest. 
 
 What Income Should Be Taxed . 
 
 All income should he taxed, to preserve the principle, but it 
 should be merely nominal until you reach six hundred dollars. 
 After that the rate of taxation should increase as the income in¬ 
 creases. It is restricted in Virginia to income derived from “in¬ 
 terest and profits.” This is wrong. It should he levied on all 
 incomes, regardless of the source from which it is derived. There 
 should he no increase of privileged property. It increases the diffi¬ 
 culty of ascertaining that wdiich should be taxed, and furnishes an¬ 
 other objection to the law. A tax on property is a tax on all 
 things. A piece of land, as such, pays tax according to its value, 
 it matters not who owns it or what is its value. An income tax 
 is strictly a personal tax. The law should ask, how much income 
 has this person? It is regardless of any particular source from 
 which it is derived. It includes all sources. 
 
 Railroad Taxation. 
 
 Our law on the subject of railroad taxation is the result of 
 much deliberation; still there are complaints as to the manner of 
 assessing the various roads of our State, and the amount of taxa¬ 
 tion to he exacted from them. 
 
 The Constitution requires that they should be taxed accord¬ 
 ing to their values, like other property, and this is fixed by ascer¬ 
 taining their values per mile. There are, however, grave doubts 
 whether this is the fairest method of ascertaining their taxable 
 value. The same trouble which has been discussed with reference 
 to other subjects arises here. Their cost per mile cannot be a fair 
 criterion by which to judge of their values, though it is one circum¬ 
 stance by which to test its accuracy. Its earnings would be another. 
 Then what earnings ? Its net or its gross earnings ? There is a dif¬ 
 ference of opinion on this subject, each of these modes having been 
 tried in various States. 
 
 [ 30 ] 
 
There is but little uniformity on this subject. The railroads 
 have received valuable rights and privileges from the people, and 
 in return they confer great benefits by extending and developing the 
 business of the State through which they pass, thus making prop¬ 
 erty more valuable and residence in the country more desirable. 
 They indicate prosperity and progress. On their lines you will see 
 evidences of thrift and energy which will be sought in vain in locali¬ 
 ties remote from them. Villages spring up and new towns and 
 cities are built, and the old ones increase in wealth and prosperity. 
 
 Every reasonable indulgence should be extended to railroads 
 until their business connections have been well established. Then 
 they should be compelled to bear their full proportion of the public 
 burden. Like assessments on other property, their values will be 
 changing according to the amount of business they are doing, and 
 what is a fair assessment to-day may after a few years of business 
 success prove insufficient for their just proportionment. Various 
 methods have been tried and each of them should be carefully exam¬ 
 ined with the results they have given, and the method which experi¬ 
 ence shows to be the best, and the fairest should be adopted. Expe¬ 
 rience alone can determine this. 
 
 Collateral Inheritance Tax. 
 
 The law in some of the States imposes a tax on collateral in¬ 
 heritances, and it is a source of considerable revenue. In Pennsyl¬ 
 vania the tax derived from this source amounted to over $700,000 
 in the year 1888. In New York, in 1887, it amounted to $551,716; 
 in 1888, $736,000; in 1889, more than $1,000,000. There is no 
 purpose to lay a burden upon the common and natural succession, 
 such as descent of property from parent to child, or from child to 
 parent, but only on such property as, through the permission and 
 protection of the statute, comes into possession of persons and cor¬ 
 porations who have had no hand in making it, and no natural claims 
 upon those from whom it is derived. It is acquired under the 
 statute, and does not come by natural right, and it would seem that 
 a gift allowed by the law may be properly taxed by the law which 
 allows it. It is an income received without labor or expense on the 
 part of the receiver—properly transferred by the permission and 
 protection of the government from the dead to the living, who has 
 no natural property rights in it. When property is so situated as 
 to pass to a new owner, who has no agency in its earnings it is onlv 
 just and reasonable that a tax should be paid to the State whose 
 law allows it. What could be more reasonable than such a tax, in 
 the final distribution of an estate ? Who could complain of it ? Not 
 the giver. If it was disagreeable to him, he could give away the 
 
 [31] 
 
property in his lifetime; not the receiver, for the law enables him to ? 
 take the property. Would any one object to the tax, when by means 
 of the law he is the recipient of the gift ? Some years ago this was J 
 the law in Virginia, but it was repealed; I do not well understand 
 why. It has been decided in various States that it is not obnoxious * 
 to the Constitution, which requires equal and uniform taxation. 
 Certainly no person can better afford to pay taxes on property than 
 those who have acquired it by gift, under a law which allows them 
 to receive it, when they could not receive it under the laws of descent, 
 which properly follows the blood and gives it to the next kin. It is 
 a very correct principle of government, in laying a tax, to impose 
 it where it can be borne most easily, and be paid with less oppres¬ 
 sion. Certainly nothing can be easier or less burdensome than to 
 contribute to the maintenance of the laws of the State a small per¬ 
 centage of that which the law allows the citizen to receive as a 
 donation and which he could not receive without, and which is not 
 the result of his labor or skill. This tax is growing in favor with 
 the law-makers, and I hope it may be thoroughly discussed, and 
 maturely considered by the legislature. I believe the State may, 
 with propriety, enact a law imposing an appropriate tax on all col¬ 
 lateral inheritances. 
 
 Tax on Private and Special Acts. 
 
 Many States impose a tax or fee for private and special acts of 
 the Legislature. There is much propriety in this, which, while it 
 is a part of the duty of the legislature to enact certain laws for 
 the benefit of private parties, yet its first function is to enact gen¬ 
 eral laws for the people. Heretofore in Virginia, a very large por¬ 
 tion of the session of the legislature has been spent in considering 
 and passing private acts, to the neglect of general legislation, and 
 the valuable time of that body, which is limited, being thus con¬ 
 sumed in considering business in which the general public had no 
 interest. The people’s money has been spent for the benefit of 
 private individuals and corporations, and the business of the State 
 became a secondary matter, and had to await the consideration and 
 completion of the private business, which could be better disposed 
 of by the courts of the country. The State is taxed to pay the cost 
 of legislation, which should be paid for out of private pockets, and 
 the work done in courts of the counties in which the parties reside. 
 
 The evil results of this have been seen for years. Laws have been 
 passed to prevent it, but they have proved to no avail. 
 
 The legislation of the last few years will show that out of 
 1.500 pages of acts in 1889-’90, 1,043 were private and 252 pages 
 were public acts. More than three-fourths of the legislation was 
 
 [ 32 ] .*) 
 
4 for local and private purposes. In the years 1891-’92, there were 
 1,146 pages of acts passed. The law separating the special acts was 
 w repealed, and we do not know what was the exact number of each, 
 ^ but we believe the proportion to be about the same for the last two 
 sessions. 
 
 If the expense of legislation be proportioned in the same way, 
 we will save the State a large amount. 
 
 The Special Acts Should he Separated from the General. 
 
 The law to consolidate the special and general legislation 
 should be repealed, because the volume is so large and inconvenient. 
 It hides the few general laws of the State among a mass of private 
 acts, in which the public has no interest. The index is hurriedly 
 prepared, and, therefore, necessarily defective, and it becomes a 
 task to find out what is the law upon a particular subject. All acts 
 passed for the general good should be placed together in' the first 
 part of the volume, and the private and local acts at the end of the 
 volume. 
 
 I would advise that an act he passed to tax every private hill, 
 and every special hill the object of which is the asking of relief 
 of the legislature, when equal relief could he given bv the courts: 
 and they should be taxed to the full extent of the cost to the State 
 necessary for its passage by the general assembly, and for its print¬ 
 ing and binding. To prevent this kind of legislation, a law was 
 passed some years ago, but no penalty was attached, and it has 
 proven inefficient. If the proposed law is passed, I am satisfied it 
 will save a considerable sum to the State in expenses; it will pre¬ 
 vent the time and minds of the members from being occupied by 
 other than public business, so that more attention can he given to 
 subjects of general legislation—all of which is greatly to be desired. 
 
 Do Our Tax Laws as Enforced Meet the Requirements? 
 
 Who believes that all the property in the State, both real and 
 personal, is taxed when it is shown that there is such a difference 
 between the taxable values of real and personal property? Does it 
 not demonstrate either that a large proportion of personal property 
 escapes the commissioner, or that it has been assessed below its 
 value? Is it not then the duty of the legislature to examine into 
 these questions at once, and to pass such laws as will remedy the 
 existing evil ? That which is overtaxed by an unjust assessment 
 should at once be relieved and the burden placed where justice re¬ 
 quires it should be. 
 
 [ 33 ] 
 
IIow to Do This. 
 
 My object in discussing the subject of taxation is to call the * 
 attention of the legislature to the gross injustice done under the 
 present laws certain species of property, in order that they may be 
 so changed that a just and reasonable taxation, which the situation 
 requires, be, if possible, obtained on all property. The difficulty 
 surrounding this important question should not retard us, but make 
 us the more diligent and determined to remedy it. Justice to the 
 people and the requirements of the Constitution demand it. 
 
 I am sure you will not allow any press of private or local de¬ 
 mands upon your time as legislators prevent your prompt atten¬ 
 tion to this subject, which concerns every section in the State and 
 all classes of our people. During biennial sessions—and they limited 
 to ninety days—there is not sufficient time for the consideration of 
 this question, so delicate and difficult. It has been a number of 
 years since we had a new tax bill. The question of taxation was not 
 considered by our revisors, who made the Code of 1887. Amend¬ 
 ments have often been engrafted upon the old legislation, but they 
 do not meet existing difficulties, which are due in part to the changed 
 condition of the property of the country, and the new investments 
 which are constantly being made render it more difficult to ascertain 
 and properly assess the property, and enable the designing to more 
 effectually conceal what they have, so as to escape taxation. 
 
 A Special Tax Commission. 
 
 Many of the States are now moving in this important matter. 
 
 We should secure the services of our best and ablest men to inves¬ 
 tigate and discuss these questions in all their phases, and to report 
 for the consideration of the general assembly, in writing, the result 
 of their labors; and a bill should be prepared relieving the State of 
 the difficulties, if possible, which the present system of tax laws 
 has produced. With this object in view I would advise!the selection 
 of a committee composed of five, taken from the different parts of 
 the State, to be called a “Special Tax Commission,” to consider the 
 subject. They should be instructed specially to inquire into the 
 systems adopted by the other States to raise revenue for State, 
 county and municipal expenses, and to provide for a more just, 
 equal and equitable system of taxation of all kinds of property, and 
 which will be better adapted to the wants of the State and reduce 
 the rate of taxation, and to provide for a more effectual system of 
 assessments and collection of taxes, all of which should be done 
 within the provisions of the Constitution of the State and of the 
 United States. The committee should be well paid, furnished with 
 
 [ 34 ] 
 
4 
 
 a good clerk, to be selected by themselves, and provided with com¬ 
 fortable quarters while engaged in this work. 
 
 I submit these views to the general assembly, with becoming 
 diffidence, in the hope that they may serve as a guide to such action 
 as may enable your honorable body to enact laws which will insure 
 the enlistment of all property, both real and personal, and the assess¬ 
 ment of the same, with equal and uniform taxation, according to its 
 value, as the Constitution requires.