of how local taxes are raised; that a financial center and seaport has very different problems to solve from an agricultural county or a mining county; that while single tax is possible under it, where a majority of the voters so decide, very different reforms are in the minds of many. Against the amendment, it was stated that in States most advanced in revenue matters the tendency is toward uniformity in methods, not diversity; communities might impose income taxes on large amounts and exempt all others; they might tax mortgages as well as the property mortgaged; they might induce enterprises to settle within their limits by giving exemptions they could not afford, force others to do the same, and no community would be the gainer. This amendment was defeated at the 1912 election. Another home-rule amendment, which would preserve in part the general property tax and not permit the substitution of an entirely new system, has been proposed by the 1913 legislature. By this amendment counties or municipalities may exempt, in whole or in part, from local taxation, by a vote of the localities concerned, any one or more of the following classes of property: improvements, shipping, and any class of personalty except franchises. All taxes on property not exempt, however, shall be uniform."

Another amendment has been proposed by the 1913 legislature on the subject of vessel exemption. A previous attempt in 1904 on this subject resulted in the rejection of the proposition. The amendment to be voted upon in 1914 would exempt all vessels of more than 50 tons burden, registered in the State and engaged in commerce, from all taxation, except for state purposes, until 1935.6

Bibliography.

The following is a list of the more important publications, in addition to the constitution, the statutes and the court reports, of value in the study of corporate taxation in California:

Message of the Governor, 1913.

Reports of Commissions on Revenue and Taxation, 1906 and 1910.

Biennial Reports of the State Board of Equalization, 1909-10 and 1911-12.

Special Report of the State Board of Equalization, "Showing First Effects of Separation" of sources of state and local revenues,

1911.

a Laws, 1913, Resolutions, chap. 87.

b Ibid., Resolutions chap. 58.

Bulletin of State Board of Equalization, "Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Convention of County Assessors' Association of California," 1912.

Special Report, State Board of Equalization, "On the Relative Burden of State and Local Taxes in 1912."

Biennial Report of State Controller, 1911-12.

Annual Reports of Financial Transactions of Municipalities and Counties, compiled by state controller, 1911 and 1912.

Biennial Report of Attorney General, 1911-12.

"Tax Reform in California," Prof. C. C. Plehn, State and Local Taxation, Fifth National Conference, 1911.

Transactions of Commonwealth Club, San Francisco, Home Rule in Taxation, Vol. VII, No. 4, October, 1912.

Pacific Municipalities, Proceedings of League of California Municipalities, Home Rule in Taxation, January and February,

1913.

"The Taxation of Franchises in California," Prof. Carl C. Plehn, National Municipal Review, July, 1912.

"A Financial History of California," William C. Fankhauser, University of California Publications in Economics, November 13, 1913.

"The Taxation of Mortgages in California, 1849 to 1899," Prof. C. C. Plehn, Yale Review, May, 1899.

Remarks on the Merits of the Present Tax System, Hon. J. B. Curtin, Senate Journal, January 22, 1913.

"A Progress Report on Corporation Taxation in California," A. B. Nye, State and Local Taxation Sixth National Conference,

1912.