The contest between Harvard College and the city of Cambridge on taxing College property has not by any means, ended with the decision of the supreme court, by which the College property was declared exempt. The board of assessors and others in the city government, who hold the view that some of the property of the College ought to be taxed, are preparing a serious movement to bring about what they consider a more equitable basis of taxation.

Tomorrow night an order will be presented in the city council, requesting the mayor to petition the legislature for the passage of an act authorizing the state to tax certain real estate owned by the College and situated in Cambridge, and providing that the sums so received shall be paid to the city of Cambridge. In this manner the city government hopes to begin an agitation of the question that will soon result in distinct issues.

The contention of the city government appears to be this: The College shares, with every other citizen of the municipality, in the police and fire protection furnished; in the sewer, street lighting, and clean street improvements; but contributes nothing to their support. The necessity of including the College property in the expense of maintaining these municipal works, they urge calls for an outlay that materially increases the tax rate of the city.

The assessors believe that as only seven per cent of the students in the University are residents of Cambridge, and as most of the students reside in various parts of this state, the state, therefore, and not the city, should bear the chief burden of taxation.

One grievance of the city government is the existence of the Harvard Co-operative Society, a general store doing business under, what they call, circumstances of a most favorable condition. Whereas the competitors of this institution, in and about Harvard square, are obliged to pay rent on taxed property, the Co-operative does business in an untaxed building for which, it is asserted, it pays no rent.