In none of the other colonies do we find so full or so frequent indications of the legislative intent as in Massachusetts. Occasional references, however, are found to the practice of assessing income. And although it is probable that the custom was gradually dying out, the storm and stress of the Revolutionary period again brought it to the front in several places.

In Connecticut we have seen that the early laws followed almost word for word the Massachusetts legislation. Later acts provided that "all such persons who by their acts and trades are advantaged shall be rated in the list . . . proportionable to their gains and returns, butchers, bakers and all other artists and tradesmen and shopkeepers.' 1 As the assessors might find it difficult to rate them justly, the law sometimes gave more explicit directions as to fixing the income. Thus the following was enacted in 1725: "For the future every one of the allowed attorneys at the law shall be set in the annual list for their faculty, i.e., those that be the least practitioners fifty pounds, and the others in proportion to their practice."2 It may be doubted whether even this settled the matter definitely.

Later enactments prove, however, that instead of directly estimating the profits of the taxpayers liable to the tax, the assessors used different criteria to compute the amount. For instance, it had several times been provided that "all traders, tradesmen and artificers shall be rated in the list proportionable to their gains and returns." But as there seems to have been no uniformity in the methods employed, the following important act 3 was passed in 1771

"All traders or shopkeepers in this Colony shall be rated in the list after the rate of ten per cent on the prime cost of all goods, wares, and merchandizes which they purchase for sale by retail (except the produce and manufactures of this Colony). And all traders by wholesale, tradesmen, artificers,

1 Acts and Laws of Connecticut. New London, 1715, p. 100.

2 Colonial Records of Connecticut, 1717-1725, vi, p. 525.

8 Ibid., 1768-1772, xiii, p. 513.

tavern-keepers, and others by law rateable on account of their faculty or business, shall be rated in the list to the amount of their annual gains, incomes or clear profits by means of their business, according to the best estimate that can be made thereof by the listers, who shall assess such traders, tradesmen, Sc. by their best discretion, agreeable to the rules aforesaid. But when it appears that any persons have been unsuccessful or sustained considerable losses in their trade, in such cases the listers may make proper abatement for the same. And if any person shall be assessed by the listers for any of the matters aforesaid more than at the rates aforesaid, upon proof thereof, by oath or otherwise, to the satisfaction of the listers, or authority and selectmen, who have right by law to grant relief, such overcharge may be abated."

The faculty tax continued in Connecticut to the close of the century substantially unchanged, with the exception that ordinary artisans were subsequently exempted. Secretary Wolcott, in his famous report on direct taxes in 1796, described the tax system as embracing first, a tax on various kinds of property, real and personal, and second, "assessments proportioned to the estimated gains or profits arising from any and all lucrative professions, trades and occupations, excepting compensations to public officers, the profits of husbandry and common labor for hire." This second. element was included in the annual lists of taxable property as "assessments on lawyers, shopkeepers, surgeons, physicians, merchants," etc. 1

In Rhode Island, where the faculty tax was originally levied as in the neighboring colonies, it seems to have fallen into disuse somewhat earlier. In 1744 the tax law still provides "that the assessors in all and every rate shall consider all persons who make profit by their faculties, and shall rate them accordingly."2 This is the last direct mention of the

1 American State Papers, Finance, i, pp. 423, 454.

2 Acts and Laws of His Majesty's Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. Newport, 1745, p. 295.

faculty tax. In 1754 and 1755 the only taxes named are those on "estates and polls."1 This expression might possibly still be considered to include faculties. But in the revision of 1766, which served as a basis of valuation during the remainder of the century, we search in vain for any mention of the faculty tax.2 And when Wolcott drew up his report in 1796, he described the system of taxation simply as one "on polls and the collective mass of property." 3 It may safely be said, therefore, that the faculty tax had disappeared in Rhode Island by the middle of the century.

In New Hampshire the faculty tax came into use somewhat later. The first detailed assessment law passed in the province, in 1719, instructed the selectmen to assess the residents "in just and equal proportion, each particular person according to his known ability and estate." Later on, in 1739, "an act for the more easy and speedy assessing" of taxes was passed, which authorized the selectmen to assess "the poles and estates of the inhabitants, each one according to his known ability.' "4 In 1772 greater definiteness was attained by the provision that a person's "faculty" should be estimated at the discretion of the assessor, although not at a sum over twenty pounds. Before the close of the century, however, the tax had disappeared. For the law of 1794, which fixed all the details of the state's system, while taxing tradesmen, storekeepers, and others, assessed them merely on their stock in trade as a part of their personal property.

6

In New York, as we know, there never was any faculty

1 Records of the Colony of Rhode Island, v, pp. 309, 465. A curious protest against the arbitrariness in the assessment of the general taxes is to be found in 1766. Ibid., vi, 518 pp.

2 Acts and Laws of the English Colonies of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, p. 219.

8 American State Papers, Finance, i. p. 422.

* Acts and Laws of His Majesty's Province of New Hampshire, 1761, pp.

30, 180.

5 Law of January 2, 1772.

6 Law of February 22, 1794; New Hampshire Laws of 1793, p. 472.

tax. But Vermont, when it split off from New York, followed the example of Connecticut in taxation as in much other legislation. The first law on the subject, that of 1778, is very explicit in its provisions, and repeats the Connecticut law in some places word for word. The part of interest to us is as follows:

"Be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that all allowed attorneys at law in this commonwealth, shall be set in the annual list for their faculty, the least practitioner fifty pounds, and the others in proportion according to their practice; to be assessed at the discretion of the listers of the respective towns where said attorneys live during their practice as such. All tradesmen, traders, artificers, shall be rated in the lists proportionable to their gains and returns; in like manner, all warehouses, shops, workhouses and mills where the owners have particular improvement or advantage thereof, according to the best judgment and discretion of the listers." In 1791 attorneys also were assessed "proportionable to their gains according to the best judgment and discretion of the listers." 2 And in 1797 the general provision was inserted that "all licensed attorneys, practitioners of physic or surgery, merchants, traders, owners of mills, mechanics, and all other persons who gain their livelihood by buying, selling, or exchanging, or by other traffic not in the regular channel of mercantile life," be listed in proportion to their returns.3

§ 3. The Middle and Southern Colonies

Outside of New England, the faculty tax was to be found also in Pennsylvania, though not until after the Revolution had commenced. In 1782 a law was enacted which imposed

1 An Act directing Listers in their Office and Duty. Printed in Laws of Vermont, 1779 (295 of Slade's State Papers). No copy of the laws of 1778 is known to be in existence. The laws of that year were embodied in the volume for 1779. See Wood, History of Taxation in Vermont, pp. 32 and 36 (Columbia University Studies in History, Economics, and Public Law, vol. iv, no. 3).

2 Laws of Vermont, 1791, p. 266.

3 Compilation of Laws of 1797, p. 565. See Wood, op. cit., p. 39.

a poll tax on all freemen. But the law went on to say that "all offices and posts of profit, trades, occupations and professions (that of ministers of the gospel of all denominations and schoolmasters only excepted) shall be rated at the discretion of the township, ward or district assessors, and two assistant freeholders of the proper township, ward or district, having due regard to the profits arising from them." 1 In 1785 mechanics and manufactures were added to the list of exempted classes. The discretion which this act left to the assessors was very slight, as the lower and higher limits of the tax were definitely fixed. In distinction from the faculty tax proper, this might rather be termed a classified poll tax with a very low maximum. For instance, freemen of no profession or calling might be assessed from fifty cents to ten dollars; mechanics and tradesmen, thirty cents to two dollars; tavern-keepers, shop-keepers, and other retailers, fifty cents to five dollars; brokers, bankers, merchants, lawyers and physicians, one to ten dollars; persons of professions or occupations not before described, twenty-five cents to eight dollars. These rates applied only when the tax on real property amounted to one per cent. When the rate fell below this, the "taxes on occupations and professions," as they were called, were to be proportionately reduced.2

In Delaware, also, we find the faculty tax. The law of 1752, indeed, simply provided that all persons should be assessed on their estates. But that this included more than mere visible property is apparent from the section which states that single men who have no visible estates shall be assessed at not less than £12 nor more than £24, and that in all cases the assessors shall pay "due regard to such as are poor and have a charge of children."3 When Wolcott described the system, he spoke of it as based on the assessment of profits. But in 1796, when a new law was passed, provision was made for

1 Laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Dallas), ii, p. 8.

2 American State Papers, Finance, i, p. 428.

3 Laws of the Government of New-castle, Kent and Sussex upon Delaware, Philadelphia, 1752, p. 234.