Regular Monthly Meeting, Thursday, March 4, 1926 A regular monthly meeting of the Chamber of Commerce was held in the Hall of the Chamber on Thursday, March 4, 1926, at 12 o'clock noon. and two hundred and fifty-five other members of the Chamber. Guest Honorable GEORGE V. MCLAUGHLIN, Police Commissioner of the City of New York, was the guest of the Chamber. Mr. MARLING, Senior Vice-President, presided. VICE-PRESIDENT MARLING.-Gentlemen, the Chamber will please come to order. In the absence of President ECKER on a well-deserved Winter vacation, it becomes my pleasure and duty to preside at this meeting. As we have a pretty long agenda, we will proceed at once with the regular order of business, and I call upon the Secretary, Mr. TAMBLYN, to read a synopsis of the Minutes of the last meeting. Minutes The Secretary read the Minutes of the regular meeting of February 4th, which were approved. NOMINATIONS FOR MEMBERSHIP WILLIAM L. DE BOST, Chairman of the Executive Committee, reported the following named candidates for membership and recommended their election: Candidates For Resident Members Nominated by JAMES SPEYER FREDERICK H. CLARKSON Seconded by JAMES BROWN WILLIAM K. CLEVERLEY Candidates GUSTAVE A. JOHNSON HOWARD V. MCELDOWNEY Seconded by CLARENCE H. KELSEY Nominated by GATES W. MCGARRAH WALLACE L. DURANT LESTER H. SPALDING FRANCIS M. WELD GEORGE P. RUTHERFORD HENRY H. EGLY LESTER H. SPALDING WILLIAM L. DE BOST HARRY A. KAHLER EMIL A. STAKE CHARLES T. GWYNNE The Chair appointed Messrs. GEORGE E. MOLLESON and JOSEPH F. EASTMOND as tellers, and the vote taken resulted in the election of the candidates for membership in the Chamber. DELEGATE TO DEDICATION OF HEROIC COLUMN ON ASTOR HILL, ASTORIA, OREGON Mr. DE BOST, on behalf of the Executive Committee, presented the following preamble and resolution, which were adopted unanimously: To the Chamber of Commerce: Whereas, This Chamber has been invited by the Mayor of the City of Astoria, Oregon, and the President of the Portland, Oregon, Chamber of Commerce, to take part in the dedication, on July 22nd, 1926, of an Heroic Column erected on Astor Hill, in the City of Astoria, Oregon, to commemorate the discovery of the Columbia River by Captain ROBERT GRAY, the exploration by LEWIS and CLARK, and the first commercial enterprise in the Oregon country accomplished through the occupancy of JOHN JACOB ASTOR (1st); and Whereas, JOHN JACOB ASTOR (1st) was a citizen of New York City and several generations of the ASTOR family have been represented in the Chamber's membership, including Mr. VINCENT ASTOR, at present a member, and through whose generosity the erection of the Heroic Column was made possible, it would seem fitting that the Chamber should take part in this historical event; therefore be it Resolved, That the President be authorized, at his discretion, to appoint a delegate to represent the Chamber at the dedication of the Heroic Column on Astor Hill in the City of Astoria, Oregon, on July 22nd, 1926. GOODING BILL ON LONG AND SHORT HAUL RATES OPPOSED FRANCIS H. SISSON, in the absence of the Chairman, presented the following report from the Committee on Internal Trade and Improvements and moved its adoption: To the Chamber of Commerce: A measure is now in Congress, known as the Gooding Bill, Senate 575, which would prohibit railroads from charging a lower freight or passenger rate for a longer distance than for a shorter one in the same direction because of water competition, either actual or potential. This Bill would serve to prevent trans-continental lines from charging higher rates to inland points than to coastwise cities. It has been urged particularly by shippers in cities in the so-called inter-mountain territory, who resent having to pay higher freight rates from the East than the Pacific Coast cities pay, where the railroads are in competition with ships moving through the Panama Canal. Your Committee on Internal Trade and Improvements is opposed to such legislation. A most vital objection is that, in effect, it puts Congress into the rate making business, and affords the opportunity for making this highly technical question the football of politics. It would take from the Interstate Commerce Commission authority over a matter which it is fully equipped to handle, and lays down a hard and fast rule which the Commission should have the power to waive when the circumstances, in its judgment, warrant it. Aside from this, the law would lay a handicap upon the transcontinental railroads. If they are forbidden to meet the competition of the water route by way of the Panama Canal, their earnings will be seriously reduced. The only alternative will be for these lines to raise their rates to the intermediate points in order that their earnings may be sufficient to enable them to continue. operations on the present scale. Such an increase as this would entail serious handicaps to the West. All the members of the Interstate Commerce Commission, except two, one of whom comes directly from the section responsible for the agitation in favor of the Gooding Bill, have gone on record as opposing it. Your Committee therefore offers the following resolution: Resolved, That the Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York is opposed to the Gooding Bill, Senate 575, or similar measures which take away from the Interstate Commerce Commission any part of its long established authority over the matter of railway rate making; and, be it further Resolved, That copies of this report be sent to the President and the members of Congress. The motion to adopt the report and resolutions was seconded and unanimously adopted. EXEMPTION OF PERSONAL PROPERTY FROM TAXATION JAMES BROWN.-Mr. President, and Members of the Chamber: You will recall that when Mayor WALKER spoke to us at the January meeting, his keynote was co-operation. I think it will be interesting for you to hear some of the things which have transpired since then. In the circumstanes, I thought it was my duty, as Chairman of the Committee on Taxation, to call upon General BERRY, the Comptroller of the City of New York, which I did, and, as a result of subsequent very cordial correspondence, the Comptroller lunched with the Committee on Taxation at the Chamber not long ago. Your Committee learned many interesting and important things about the finances of the City of New York at that time, and there were no questions that we asked but what were promptly replied to. The conversations were strictly confidential, and, therefore, will not be divulged, but I think it would be of great satisfaction to this Chamber to know that the Committee was greatly impressed with the manner in which General BERRY, during his short term of office, had acquired such intimate knowledge of the City's finances. Other subjects besides taxation were discussed, and we were particularly impressed with the soundness of the views expressed by the Comptroller. Carrying out the policy of co-operation, your Committee is in a position to say that not only its reports in favor of the repeal of the personal property tax and on the increased cost of Government, but also the report on Subways and City Debt Limit have been discussed with the Comptroller and met with his entire approval. I have now to call your attention to the report on Exemption of Personal Property from Taxation, which is in your hands. I do not think I can add anything to this report. As an indication, however, of our special interest in this subject, and of its significance to the citizens of the City of New York, it was stated in a recent report that in 1920, $6,428,000 was collected in taxes from this source in the entire state, and that of this amount only $259,000 was collected outside of Greater New York. Stated differently, the dwellers in the Greater City paid nearly 96% of the tax. In view of this and many other considerations, your Committee offers this report and resolutions: Report To the Chamber of Commerce: A bill, S. Int. 455, A. Int. 636, has been introduced in the Legislature, to exempt from taxation all personal property now assessed under the General Property Tax. Your Committee on Taxation believes this law should be enacted. The personal property tax was carefully studied by this Committee in 1910, and the period since its first enactment in 1800 was reviewed. In a report to the Chamber in May of that year, it was pointed out in much detail how the number of exemptions from this tax has been steadily increased, until in recent years the personal property tax provided a very small amount of the revenues collected. A repeal of the tax was declared desirable. The relative importance of real estate and personal estate is shown by the yearly table of assessed valuations in the State of New York. In 1902 real estate was assessed at $5,169,308,070 and personal estate at $585,092,312. Since then real estate assessments have steadily advanced and personal estate has made an irregular decline, until in 1924 these items stood at $17,084,819,872 for real estate, and $216,815,571 for personal estate. In other words, the assessments on personal estate has dropped from around 10 per cent. to 2 per cent. of the assessments on real estate; and the total revenues collected are very insignificant. Your Committee understands that the personal property assessment for 1926 brings to the City slightly over $5,000,000. Estimates made in the report of the Special Joint Committee on Taxation and Retrenchment. submitted to the Legislature March 1, 1922, estimated the 1920 yield, in the entire State, at $6,428,000. Of this amount only $259,000 was collected in the State outside of Greater New York. The city, of course, would need income from other sources to replace the loss of the $5,000,000 now produced by the personal property tax. This could very well be made up by allowing the city a larger proportion of the State Income Tax. Under the present arrangement, the city receives only about $13,000,000 from this tax, which is greatly out of proportion to the large collections made in the City of New York. A study of our taxing system in recent years shows that an important increase has been made in special taxes at specific |