The escape of money, credits and securities from assessment can not be statistically shown, though it can be roughly established in the case of money. The law considers deposits subject to sight check as cash.3 Deposits of individuals along with the cash in pocket or in the cash drawer are assessed as money on hand. Continuous statistics of deposits are available only for the national banks. Since 1905 the amounts of individual deposits in state banks are available, but before that date deposits in the few state banks chartered in the Reconstruction period and in private banks were not reported except partially, unofficially, and very occasionally by the Comptroller of the Currency. By comparing the amount of individual deposits in national banks at the date nearest to January 1 with the assessment of money on hand January 1, the evasion of money is conclusively, though roughly, established.4

1 Special Report of the U. S. Census on Wealth, Debt and Taxation, 1907, p. 41. It will be noted that the census does not give the real value of taxable real property, but only that of all real property, and this latter amount includes the value of some real property which is exempt from taxation. This must be held in mind in comparisons with 1890, and in judging of the escape of real property from taxation.

2 Report of the U. S. Census on Wealth, Debt, and Taxation, 1913, vol. 1, pp. 23 and 748. It should be noted that in 1913 as in 1904 the census does not permit comparisons with 1890.

3 Campbell v. Wiggins, 2 Texas Crim. App., 1 (1892).

4 The demand deposits of individuals in state banks on December 31. 1909, were $28,940,000, which added to those in national banks made a total of $184,718,000. Assessed money on hand was only 13 per cent of this total. The deposits of individuals in state banks on January.

Goods, wares and merchandise are a species of property, which though visible are because of their complexity impossible of assessment by the assessor. The following table shows the amount assessed at selected dates.

Even the proverbial person who does not get out of the rain knows that the value of merchants' stocks in 1915 were more than 6.14 times greater than they were in 1880.

13, 1914, the same date as the report of the national banks, were $79,697,000, and the aggregate of national and state deposits was $283,552,000. Assessments of money were about 7 per cent of this. When one takes into consideration the money not on deposit in the banks, the amount assessed in proportion to the amount assessable was much below 7 per cent. The writer fully realizes the limitations applying to the use of these statistics, and the amounts and percentages are not given as exact demonstrations of the escape of money. The bank deposits of non-residents of the state are not assessable here, nor are public deposits, the deposits of exempt institutions, nor the deposits of other banks assessable.

The laws have been amended from time to time to close loopholes and these changes reveal some of the ways by which taxes were evaded. In 1888 the practice of removing; property temporarily from the state in order to avoid taxation was covered by law, and in 1891 the device of converting upon the books of banks taxable money into non-taxable treasury notes was made illegal.1 Livestock in pastures lying in more than one county had their situs defined in 1887, and in 1905 there was legislation to prevent the escape from taxation of timber on public lands leased or sold.2 The current method of evading taxes on money is to have the same converted into New York exchange just preceding January 1, despite the fact that the method is declared to be unlawful.

Reliance, however, has been placed upon strengthening the oaths which taxpayers, assessing officers, and boards of equalization must make.3 The most notable of all efforts of this character was made in 1907 in the so-called "Full Rendition Act."4 This act defined the standard of valuation of property to be its "reasonable cash market value," or in case it should have no "market value" its "real or intrinsic value." The duty was devolved upon assessors and county boards of equalization to permit no property to be assessed except at these values; they were put under oath to discharge this duty, and neglect or refusal on their part to comply constituted malfeasance in office for which they could be removed from office upon suit brought by the attorney general or under his direction. In 1909 it was made the duty of boards of equalization to see that property was rendered at a "fair market value."5 As a result mainly of the "full rendition act" there was an increase of $538,825,000 in the assessed values of 1908 over those of 1907. The number of acres of land assessed increased by 2,383,000; the assessed value of rural real property increased $290,330,000, the assessed value of town and city real property increased $118,620,000. The total increase in the assessed value of real estate was $408,929,000. Of the remainder of the increase in 1908, railroad property made up $50,-039,000; credits of others than banks and bankers, $15,076,000; goods and merchandise $15,049,000; national bank shares, $13,-245,000; horses and mules, $12,418,000; miscellaneous and other items, $24,065,000. While assessed credits of individuals increased $15,076,000, money assessed decreased $4,734,000. The act thus affected chiefly real property, railroads, tangible personalty, and such intangible personalty, like bank stock, as is easily reached. Though designed to correct undervaluation of real property and though resulting in a very large increase in the assessed value of such property, it has not been successful. A comparison of the average true value of agricultural land in each county as given by the Thirteenth Census with the average assessed value of lands and buildings as given in the report of the state comptroller for 1911, shows that in only six counties were assessed values as much as 90 per cent of true values; in seven counties they were between 80 per cent and 90 per cent; in thirteen between 70 per cent and 80 per cent; in twenty-seven between 60 per cent and 70 per cent; in forty-three between 50 per cent and 60 per cent; in sixty-four between 40 per cent and 50 per cent; in thirty-nine between 30 per cent and 40 per cent; in thirty between 20 per cent and 30 per cent; and in six they were under 20 per cent.1 Five of the six counties which were assessed at 90 per cent and over were in East Texas and had comparatively small population and wealth, while the wealthier counties, the famed black land counties, fell as a rule under 50 per cent. The varying percentages of assessed to true values result in unequal taxation for state purposes, and they clearly show the need of some centralized or state control or supervision of the assessing officers and county boards of equalization, if the real property tax is to be retained for state purposes.1 This need becomes greater as the general revenue rate increases and as special state taxes, like the school and the pension taxes, come to be employed.

1 Laws of 1888, p. 3. Laws of 1891, p. 39. Laws of 1897, Reg. Sess., p. 203. Rev. Civil Stats., 1911, art. 7545.

2 Laws of 1887, p. 109. Laws of 1889, p. 29. Laws of 1905, p. 72.

3 Laws of 1897, Reg. Sess., p. 293. Laws of 1907, p. 459.

4 Laws of 1907, p. 459.

5 Laws of 1909, p. 372. Rev. Civil Stats., 1911, art. 7564. Arts. 7530 and 7569 carry the obsolete expressions "true and full value" and "reasonable cash market value."

1 The census excludes some lands which if included would diminish the average true value, but it does not include, as does the comptroller, the value of farm buildings. If buildings were included, the average true value would be much larger. The percentage of underassessment is, therefore, really much greater than is shown above, because of the omission of buildings from the census figures. The census figures are not accepted as accurate, but as nearly accurate as can be obtained.

In 1913 and 1914 in some of the counties persons were employed by the commissioners' courts to unearth unrendered property, especially vendor's lien notes. The contracts with these "tax ferrets" or "tax adjusters" were held illegal, and the money collected through their activity was refunded.2

1 Bulletin of the University of Texas, No. 236, "Some Corporation and Taxation Problems of the State," p. 124. Dallas News, June 12, 1912. 2San Antonio Express, February 15, 1914.