sessed personal property in a similar manner. The figures as to the cities relate to the year 1896, those for the towns to the year 1895. But this difference in date, a consequence of the different modes in which the commission found it necessary to procure the information, does not materially affect its pertinence for the general problems of the tax system.

In the cities (except Boston and Somerville) the assessed personalty was classified as follows:

It will be seen that in the thirty cities (not including Boston and Somerville) the tangible personal property assessed was in the ratio of two to one to the intangible. Machinery is by far the largest item in the class of tangible personalty; next comes stock in trade; the other items are comparatively small. For the intangible personalty the classification evidently signifies nothing. Almost all the personalty of this sort is assessed by estimate or doomage in a lump sum, and is variously called "cash assets," "securities," "investments," "stocks and bonds," the separation of the various items being nominal. The only item which we may suppose to be really treated separately by the assessors is that of income. The figures under this head probably give some indication as to the independent yield of the tax imposed on incomes from trade and profession exceeding $2000 per year.

In Boston, the assessors, when estimating or dooming per

sonal property, put down one lump sum, not distinguishing on their records what is the nature of the personalty estimated, whether machinery, stock in trade, cash assets, or other taxable personalty; hence it is not possible to secure from their records information such as is given in regard to other cities. In former years, and until 1894, the assessors in Boston published information as to the nature of the personalty taxed according to sworn returns. In the last year in which this information was published (1894) it appears that $38,312,800 of personal property, out of a total of $204,365,192, was taxed by sworn return made by individuals; and the sum so taxed according to sworn return was made up as follows:

(The commission then proceeds to make an estimate of the comparative amounts of tangible and intangible personalty assessed by dooming in Boston, and comes to the conclusion that tangible personalty exceeds intangible, although perhaps to a less degree than in other cities.)

As is to be expected, in view of the small number of sworn returns, vastly the larger part of the personal property is assessed by estimate or doomage; and this holds good of both kinds, whether tangible or intangible. As appears from the

detailed figures, the amounts in twenty-eight cities (not including Boston, Lynn, Somerville, and Taunton) may be classified as follows:

The situation in the towns is in some respects different from that in the cities, in some respects the same. Taking all the towns of the state, it will appear that the intangible personal property exceeds the tangible. But, putting aside a few towns in which the conditions are peculiar, and considering the great mass of towns, we find the same proportion as in the cities, the tangible personal property is to the intangible personal property as two to one. It will be remembered that the information as to the towns was secured by compilation from certain returns made to the tax commissioner for a different purpose, which do not in all cases separate the items in the exact manner desirable for our inquiry. But the figures which we have compiled are, nevertheless, in their main results trustworthy and significant.

The following general figures give a summary statement of the situation in the towns:

1 The eighteen selected towns are: Arlington, Belmont, Brookline, Cohasset, Easton, Falmouth, Groton, Hopedale, Lancaster, Lincoln, Manchester, Mattapoisett, Milton, Nahant, Stockbridge, Swampscott, Wellesley, Weston. These eighteen towns include ten of the sixteen towns enumerated on another page as having an exceptionally high percentage of personal property in their valuation.

Intangible personal property crowds into a small number of towns; these, moreover, are, as a rule, towns of no very large population. These towns, less than 6 per cent of the whole number, have over 60 per cent of the securities, investments, cash assets, etc., assessed in all the towns, and over 25 per cent of such property assessed in the state. Having a population in all of 62,529, they have an assessed valuation of $52,570,721 of intangible personalty, or not much less than the total of such property assessed in thirty cities (not including Boston and Somerville) having a population of 1,086,647. In these few towns the intangible personalty enormously outweighs the tangible, as sixteen to one. But in the remaining towns of the commonwealth the conditions are similar to those in the cities, excepting Boston, the intangible personalty being to the tangible in the ratio of about one to

two.

Out of the total of $147,800,703 of personalty assessed in the towns, $64,008,262 was tangible personalty, $83,792,441 was intangible. As in the cities, the most important single item of tangible personalty is machinery ($22,885,187); stock in trade stands next ($21,299,223), then live stock ($14,655,746), carriages ($4,107,315), ships and vessels ($949,158). Under the head of intangible personalty the largest item is that of cash assets and securities ($52,405,119). But here, as in the case of the cities, the precise designation given to the intangible property by the assessors is of very little value as a guide to the true amount of each particular kind of property actually reached. An exception may, however, be made to this general statement as to the item of income, a small amount in the towns ($1,529,705), which probably states the actual separate assessment of this part of the taxed "personal property."

From this summary of the available statistical material we proceed to a further consideration of the taxation of the several kinds of personal property.

The forms of personal property which are most regularly and unfailingly taxed are live stock in farming towns, and ships and vessels. In a farming town, it is as well known how many cattle a taxpayer has as how much land he owns. No sworn statement is needed, and few are made. The assessors, from

inspection and from verbal statements, ascertain what live stock each taxpayer owns, and assess him accordingly. Similarly, ships and vessels are easily and unfailingly taxed. The valuations of these forms of tangible personal property, and especially of live stock, vary in the different towns, some assessing them to their full market value, others assessing them less strictly. In the purely farming towns, the same tendency appears in the assessment of live stock as in that of real estate; in order to keep the tax rate from rising too high, the valuation is strict. The taxation of live stock in such towns is as certain and as burdensome as is the taxation of land there.

In the cities, and in the towns not mainly agricultural, the methods of taxing personal property of these kinds vary greatly. Sometimes the assessors count separately each horse, cow, carriage, or other visible piece of personal property; then adding, if they think there is cause, a lump sum for intangible property. Sometimes they simply estimate the whole of a taxpayer's personalty in one lump sum. The former method is followed, for example, in the city of Cambridge; the latter is followed in the city of Boston and also in the town of Brookline. These differences in three large adjoining places indicate how diverse is the working of the tax system in different parts of the commonwealth.

In the farming towns, in which live stock is most fully and regularly assessed, the result is not unjust as between the individual taxpayers of those localities. It does often bring it about, however, that these towns pay a larger share than is just of state and county taxes, because their total valuation is high, and their assessment for state and county taxes correspondingly large. For these real difficulties we shall propose some remedy. But it is not clear that anything would be gained in these parts of the commonwealth if it were enacted, as is proposed by some organizations, that all local taxation be confined to real estate, and all personal property, including live stock, be exempt from local taxes. The result of such a change in these places would be that, the total tax burden for town purposes remaining the same, some individuals would pay a larger share and some a smaller share than at present. The farmers having much live stock as compared with their real