The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

P e e e e e es 1e Mtr. Harcourt next quoted an mind in discussing "these --resolutions ® 1 32 from The Weekly 33..- O*m and the principle of this bill. Last year opintion that while the bill did not make there were 37 banks which did business a systematic attempt to remove the in Canada, on a capital exceeding $63,-- inequalities in taxation which exist in 000,000, and they paid an average divi-- Ontario, its general provisions were in dend on that cavital of considerably the ~right direction and would meet | over 7 per cent. These facts spoke with | with approval. It was to be regretted \the greatest emphasis of the stability ' that some writers had sought to give lof the foundations of the banks and the impressilon that the resolutions in '\the confidence reposed by the public in their working were calculated to do an the management of the institutions, act of injustice to Toronto, and that and the Government were glad to be :2"' afcuu:tlon had even been made that able to convince the electors that the w: C to{;d'as being robbed. If this bill provision in the bill before the House o slrft m for the Province as a whole relating to banks would not appreci-- T culd * l'"'"t ratepayer of Toronto ably affect their earning power or the i raise his voice against its provis-- €ividend which they might issue. ons. So far as Mr. Harcourt's ex-- | x;eril:nce":ent Toronto had been fairly Insurance Companies. ' dealt with, and h e 5 ' of a single case lnew}}l\?gh '{;te ltgto;f:slt: There was a change also in tbo clause . of this + $ relating to insurance companies other great city had been discrimin-- 3 T ht b kKed. w1 ated against either by a committee of thar life. _ it mig e as 9.,' why | the House or the Legislature itself. It change the system of taxation ? W.hy + was not a patriotic argument to ;!ay not apply the same principle to in-- that Toronto was being injured, but if surance companies that was applieq to such an argument were advanced Mr the banks ? He would show how im-- Harcourt could show abundantly from | possible that was. Some of the United the records that the city had been the States life companies had no capital at most favored municipality in the Pro-- 'all. The Equitable Life of New York vince. Last year and the year before Gid a tremendous business, but had a direct money grants to the amount of |capital of only $100,000. In Canada some more than $100,000 were given by the | of the companies had little or no paid-- Legislature to schools and hospitalsa \ up capital. The Ontario Mutual Life and for the administration of justice |\ had none. The Canada Life had a very in Toronto. If it were necessary, to 'small capital when the tremendous vol--= make calculations based upon the in-- ume of business which had been rolled direct advantages which accrued to the |up by that phenomenally successful city by reason of its being the seat | company was considered. Then as to of legislation and of learning, and be-- fire companies, the paid--up capital cause of the central courts of justice !(-ould not be applied to them as & being held here, all would agree that | basis, because some very large British Toronto had been & favored municipal{-- ) companies were not corporations hav-- ty. Mr. Harcourt, however, took the \ ing capital stocks ; they were in the grourd that the city was not injured nature of co--partnership concerns. Sev-- by a single provision of the present \eral very important companies came bill. |\ under that clause, among the};fn t};x: Liy-- T id E y 'erpool & London & Globe, the Phoenix ' axes PaideMist#hote: | of London, the Guardian Fire and Life, Last year New York State derived the Atlas and the Caledonia. Taking a $330.828 from insurance corporations; these two classes into consideration, it Pennsylvania, $684,888; Tilinols, $164.000; was therefore apparent that the one Ohio,. _ $99,400, _ and . Massachusetts, basis of taxation could not with mathe-- $587,000 . matical precision be applied to all the As to banks, the following taxes were companies affected. Accordingly the naid for doing business in New York tax was imposed on the gross prem-- State last year:--Rank of British NYorth itms. _ The argument might be ad-- America, $8,750; (',anadian' Bank of Com-- \ vanced that the tax should apply to net Tr;wrce\. $8,265; Merchant's Bank, $2,500; \ earnings and not gross premiums, but ank of Montreal. $28,.789. The latter \the former could not be adopted as a sum was 60 per cent. of all the receipts dg carce!l r basis. No two Judges $ Y which would accrue to Ontario under had as yet agreed in the 'de-- :x';e; baikitie.portion of The new sched-- finition dof n'et u:eatmlng's'; ltI)t had Tew » been said tritely at a schoolboy can N.N? (?m;( Stuadt:();ec;'l'\:'eg h;{);?m?:'e, define gross earnings, and that the t $243,726, and from the Man-- Judges of the.land fail to agree as to hattan. $116,837. The Royal Insurance what net earnings are. Tow take not (Co, of England paid $4.179 simply for earnings as a basis woqld be a \grs the privilege of doing business last year confusing and very lqtn(-ate mode® of in the State of New York, while the taxation, and would yield less revenuet Commercial Union paid $2,534. than by the other method. The Changes Made. Trust Companies. Procecding to explain the changes A change had been decided upon in made in the bill, Mr. Harcourt pointed regard to trust companies. It was pro-- out that the one in regard to banks was vided that the--sum of $250 should be important. It was provided that each imposed where the paid--up capital was bank should pay, one--tenth of one per $100,000 or less, and $65 on every addi-- cent. on its' paid up _ capi-- ticral $100,000 or less of paid--up capital. | tal stock, but when the _ naid-- "It was thought, however, that these| up capital stock exceeded $6,000,000 provisions might not reach the case of | | ' such excess was exempted from the some larger concerns which had boen' ' provisions of the bill. Under the as--, in business for a considerable time. and | sessment act banks only paid a tax (ml the business of which had been profit-- | | real estate and were not taxed on their 3 1 _ hm