PRINCIPLES OF TAXATION. 513 



On the other hand, let us consider for a moment the converse of 

 this proposition — namely, that titles are property, and, as such, 

 ought not to be exempt from taxation. If this is so, then it would 

 seem to follow that, by making titles, we can make property; and 

 that when a man mortgages his farm for ten thousand dollars, the 

 community have ten thousand dollars' worth of real estate and 

 ten thousand dollars' worth of personal property, where, before 

 the execution of the mortgage, there was only the specified value 

 of the real estate. On the other hand, when the mortgage is 

 paid off, ten thousand dollars' worth of personal property is de- 

 stroyed, and by a parity of reasoning the State must be to that 

 extent the poorer. A clear comprehension, then, of the facts, that 

 property is embodied labor; that property can alone suffice to pay 

 taxes; that rights, titles, and credits are but the representatives of 

 property; and that, having subjected the property to taxation, there 

 is no sense or equity in again assessing its representative, will at 

 once divest the problem of taxation from many embarrassments 

 which now seem to invest it, greatly simplify it, and go far toward 

 the determination of sound and fixed tax principles. 



Important decisions touching the question here under considera- 

 tion that have recently been rendered by courts of high repute are 

 also here worthy of notice. Thus, in California, the Supreme Court 

 of the State has had before it the vexed question of taxation of 

 mortgages, and the judges have decided, in accordance with justice 

 and common sense, that, as mortgages do not in any way increase 

 the body of wealth in a community, any tax laid upon them is laid 

 upon a fictitious value; is in so far an imposition upon the taxpayer, 

 and, inasmuch as it represents a second tax on real estate already 

 taxed in the hands of the owner, is " double " taxation within the 

 meaning of that term in the Constitution of California and other 

 States. 



In 1875 the following case came before the Supreme Court of 

 New York (General Term) under the following circumstances: The 

 administrators of a citizen being taxed by the proper tax authorities 

 of the State for a large amount of personal property, put in a 

 schedule of personal assets consisting mainly of certificates of stock 

 in various railroad and mining companies, with a plea for abatement. 

 The court, after consideration, through Noah Davis, P. J., ren- 

 dered the following decision : " We are of the opinion also that the 

 commissioners erred in including in their assessment the stocks of 

 corporations created by and under the laws of other States. Such 

 corporations are taxable, and we must presume, in the absence of 

 proof, that taxes in their respective home States are duly assessed 

 and collected upon their capital stock or property. The stocks in 



VOL. LII. 38 



