36 /. E. Lc Rossignol and W. D. Stewart 



the adoption of the new system involves a shifting of the burden 

 of local taxation from the many to the relatively few, and those 

 few, in a progressive community, are usually those best able to 

 bear it. In a stationary or declining community the case might 

 be quite different. 



Where the system has been adopted in counties containing 

 towns, the taxes on rural property are relatively increased and 

 those of town property relatively decreased ; so that the country 

 people complain and demand a system of differential rating, or a 

 separation of the towns from the rural districts for purposes of 

 rating. Again, in rural districts the rates fall more heavily upon 

 the holdings of new settlers than upon the improved holdings of 

 their more prosperous neighbors. 



7. Land values have risen greatly, notwithstanding the tax. 

 This, together with the slight amount of the tax, is probably the 

 cause of the general indifference of ratepayers to the question. 

 There is still a great deal of speculation in land, and land values 

 are probably too high, in view of a possible and even probable 

 fall in prices of mutton and wool because of increasing compe- 

 tition on the part of Australia and Argentina. 



8. Many of the ratepayers, if not a majority, have had their 

 rates reduced and are well satisfied with this result. Many others 

 are indifferent. The working class, who are interested in the se- 

 curing of lower rents, are largely in favor of rating on unim- 

 proved values, but only those who own property can vote on the 

 question. Town clerks are inclined to favor the system because, 

 if adopted for all rates, it would permit of a simplified system of 

 bookkeeping. The minority who suffer hardship do not seem to 

 have sufficient influence to have the system abolished. 



The case of North-east Valley is of particular interest since it 

 is the onlv district that has adopted the svstem and afterward 

 ^'♦feifelilttdoned it. The borough has a population of 4,467. It 

 adopted rating on unimproved values on January 12. 1905, and 

 voted for rescission on March 30, 1908. In reply to the govern- 

 ment's circular, the borough reported as follows : "Decreases 

 rates on buildings. Increases rates payable on land. Encourages 

 building operations. Attracts population. Does not materially 



284 



