it is considered that the credits thus far assessed consist almost wholly or at least very largely of real estate mortgages and other credits the evidences of which are a matter of public record and the ease with which, to the present time, these credits could be ascertained and listed, in most parts of the state, as compared with the much greater quantity of unknown and unascertainable credits of other sorts above mentioned, it will be perceived that the seeming progress made in 1902 does not of itself give much assurance that such further progress will be made as will secure anything near the full assessment of all kinds of taxable credits in the future, or even that the mark made in 1902 can be maintained.

The most important information, perhaps, disclosed in the statistics of the assessment of credits is the marked inequality in the results accomplished by local assessing officers as between different portions of the state. In Table B., which shows results by counties for the years 1898-1902 inclusive some of this want of uniformity may be noticed. The discrepancies are much less marked in the year 1902 than in former years, owing largely to the work of county supervisors of assessments; but even in 1902 the inequalities are very great. A few instances are presented in the following table, in which population and other data are given to facilitate comparisons.

In the foregoing table it has been sought to arrange in pairs or groups counties in which conditions are similar. Attention is asked to the assessment of credits in Douglas and Iron counties as compared with their neighboring counties bordering on Lake Superior; to that in Clark county as compared with Marathon; Waushara with Portage; Fond du Lac and Sheboygan with Winnebago; Lincoln with Oconto; Taylor with Langlade; Rock with Walworth and Grant; Green, with Iowa and Lafayette; Milwaukee with any of the leading counties and with the entire state.

The unequal operation of the laws for the assessment of credits is better shown in Tables C., D. and E. In these tables the assessment districts of the state are arranged in groups. Cities and villages which are independent assessment districts are classified in groups according to population; and all towns including those containing villages not constituting independent districts are included in a single group, except that in a few instances where an important village or a city and a town together constitute a single assessment district, such district is classed as a city or village district and placed in the group of city and village districts corresponding to its population. The town of Vaughn including the village of Hurley, town of Hayward including the village of Hayward, town of Washburn including the village of Washburn, the town of Darlington including the city of Darlington are some of the exceptions mentioned. In Table C., as to each group, the statistics of assessed valuations are reduced to percentage ratios for each of the years mentioned. In Table D. the same ratios are condensed upon a single sheet under an arrangement better calculated to facilitate comparisons. In Table E. is shown the assessment of credits per capita in each of the several groups mentioned. In all these tables statistics for 1899 are given as well as for subsequent years, to afford comparisons of results since the work of the commission in the supervision of assessments was begun with results in the year 1899 in which no supervision was attempted.

An examination of the figures in these tables will show some marked differences in the assessment of credits in some of the

groups as compared with others in each of the years for which statistics are given, and it will be seen that the inequalities in results seem to be as marked in 1902 as in any previous year,— perhaps more so. It will be noticed that the inequalities indicated by the percentage ratios given in Table D. are strongly corroborated by the per capita figures given in Table E. Perhaps the most remarkable feature of the showing made in these three tables is the much greater proportion of credits assessed in the villages and cities of less than five thousand inhabitants than in the larger cities or in the balance of the state. To show this more clearly for the year 1902 the subjoined table has been prepared, in which the results in several groups of assessment districts have been combined in various ways.