To the Committee on Roads and Internal Navigation: By Mr. COOKE: A bill to authorize railroad companies terminating on navigable waters to guarantee bonds of companies building or owning steamboats or vessels used or to be used in connection with the business of the railroad, and to confirm all such guarantees heretofore made. To the Committee on Banks, Currency and Commerce: By Mr. NICOL: A bill to provide for State banks of circula tion. To the Committee on Chesapeake and its Tributaries: By Mr. DIGGS: A bill to protect fish in the Mattaponi, Pamunkey and York rivers by preventing fishing with certain fixed. devices. The morning hour having expired, the House proceeded to the business on the calendar. The following Senate bills were read a third time and passed: No. 2, Senate bill entitled an act to authorize the directors and managers of the Female orphan asylum at Fredericksburg, Virginia, to transfer, convey and deliver the real and personal property of that corporation to the Assembly's home and school at Fredericksburg, Virginia, so soon as the last-named corporation is organized under its charter. No. 3, Senate bill entitled an act to incorporate the Assembly's home and school at Fredericksburg, Virginia. Motions severally made by Messrs. MASON and COLEMAN to reconsider the votes by which the bills were passed were rejected. No. 2, House bill to authorize the supervisors of Warren county to borrow $7,000, to be used in the construction of approaches to the two bridges across the north and south branches of the Shenandoah river, at Riverton, in said county, was read a second time and ordered to be engrossed. The bill being presently engrossed, Mr. DowNING moved that it be read a second time this day; which was agreed to, twothirds in the House so determining. The bill was read a third time and passed. Mr. DOWNING moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; which motion was rejected. No. 3, House bill to legalize the issue of certain bonds of the city of Roanoke, was read a second time and ordered to be engrossed. On motion of Mr. SAUNDERS, the House adjourned until tomorrow at 12 o'clock M. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 1893. Prayer by Rev. Dr. J. B. Newton, of the Monumental Episcopal church. On motion of Mr. WILLARD, the reading of the Journal was dispensed with. Leave of absence was granted Mr. GREGORY for two days. A communication was received from the governor by his secretary informing the House that his Honor Lyman Chalkley, judge of the county court of Alleghany, had tendered his resignation and the same accepted Which was referred to the Committee for Courts of Justice. To the General Assembly: GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, RICHMOND, VA., December 12, 1893. The Constitution of Virginia requires that all the property within the State shall be taxed according to its value. It is conceded that some is taxed above its value, some below it, and much is not taxed at all. I have read the legislation of a number of the States, and the reports of various committees and the opinions of writers of experience and ability on this subject, and after much consideration submit this message to your honorable body. 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 uncertain, and property so insecure, that they would be burdens, not blessings. 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. Nothing which a legislative body does is examined so closely and occasions so much criticism as a tax bill. To take what is necessary 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 dis agreeable feeling that he has been robbed of what belongs to himself, for the benefit of others. This has been a prolific cause of disputes between the people 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 assessment 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," shall be taxed in proportion to its value. "No 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." (See Constitution of Virginia, article X., section 1.) HOW IS THE AMOUNT AND VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY TO BE ASCERTAINED? 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." How do you ascertain the cash value? There is no rule laid down for his guidance in this delicate and difficult duty. Each assessor exercises his own judgment as to the proper manner of ascertaining the values in the various counties and cities in the Commonwealth. It must necessarily be filled with errors, with the usual differences of opinion which attend all questions submitted to so many different 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 be 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 would be to ascertain the value according to the income derived. from it. This also would often be inaccurate, because it would necessarily depend on the industry, intelligence and business habits of the owner. The same property under the management of one person might return a handsome remuneration, while in the hands of another bring its owner into debt. It is difficult 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 assessment, 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 true selling value at voluntary 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 selling at much less than its real value, when the Constitution says no land shall be 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. How much land is there in Virginia which could not be sold at any price for cash? How little there is which could be 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 assessments 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 abandoned the standard required by the law, is without guide, and subject to the passions of the importunate tax-payer, who all the time will pull downward. The desire of each locality to avoid the payment 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 board of equalization 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 immediately 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 according 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 bear it, and which will be 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 exchange, and this can be used as a fair criterion for the ascertainment 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. too 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 be 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 personal 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 New 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 property in the State of New 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 be rapidly rushing towards bankruptcy. From 1870 to 1880 the census returns show that the assessed valuation of the personal property of the United States decreased one million and a quarter, and from 1880 to 1890 the decrease was even greater; the real estate increasing during the |