Supplement, dated October 5, 2007, to the Prospectuses
                    for each of the following Seligman Funds:

                 Prospectuses, each dated February 1, 2007, for
  Seligman Core Fixed Income Fund, Inc., Seligman Municipal Fund Series, Inc.,
   Seligman Municipal Series Trust, Seligman New Jersey Municipal Fund, Inc.,
                Seligman Pennsylvania Municipal Fund Series, and
                  Seligman TargetHorizon ETF Portfolios, Inc.

                   Prospectuses, each dated March 1, 2007, for
       Seligman Frontier Fund, Inc. and Seligman Global Fund Series, Inc.

                    Prospectuses, each dated May 1, 2007, for
        Seligman Capital Fund, Inc., Seligman Cash Management Fund, Inc.,
    Seligman Common Stock Fund, Inc., Seligman Communications and Information
 Fund, Inc., Seligman Growth Fund, Inc., Seligman High Income Fund Series,
Seligman Income and Growth Fund, Inc., Seligman LaSalle Real Estate Fund
                                 Series, Inc.,
    Seligman Portfolios, Inc., Seligman Time Horizon/Harvester Series, Inc.,
        Seligman Value Fund Series, Inc. and Tri-Continental Corporation
                           (collectively, the "Funds")

The  following  supersedes  and replaces  the  information  contained  under the
heading entitled  "Frequently Asked Questions About Regulatory  Matters" in each
Fund's Prospectus:

In late 2003,  Seligman  conducted an extensive  internal  review in response to
public  announcements  concerning mutual fund trading  practices.  The following
discussion has been prepared to provide shareholders with important information.

For purposes of this  discussion,  J. & W. Seligman & Co.  Incorporated  and its
affiliates  and related  parties are referred to as "Seligman" or the "Manager,"
and the Seligman open-end registered investment companies are referred to as the
"Seligman Funds."

Q1.   Have any Seligman employees engaged in improper trading?

A.    The Manager  conducted an internal review of employee trading in shares of
      the Seligman  Funds in the fall of 2003 and continues to monitor  employee
      trading in the  Seligman  Funds.  The Manager  has not found any  improper
      trading activity by Seligman employees.

Q2.   Does  Seligman  have any policies  relating to employee  investment in the
      Seligman Funds?

A.    A majority of Seligman  employees  invest in the  Seligman  Funds,  either
      directly or through the  Seligman  401(k)  plans.  Trading by employees is
      monitored  by  the  Manager's  legal  department  and  is  subject  to the
      Manager's  Code of Ethics.  In  addition,  unlike many  401(k)  plans that
      permit daily trading, the Seligman 401(k) plans permit only weekly trading
      activity. All Seligman employees have been informed that excessive trading
      with respect to the Seligman Funds, or trading in the Seligman Funds based
      upon inside  information,  is inappropriate  and may, in certain cases, be
      illegal.  Employees who engage in inappropriate trading will be subject to
      disciplinary action, which may include termination of employment.

Q3.   Has  Seligman  engaged  in  improper  disclosure  of  a  Fund's  portfolio
      holdings?

A.    The Manager has found no  improprieties  relating to the  disclosure  of a
      Fund's  portfolio  holdings.  The Manager has not  disclosed  and does not
      disclose a Fund's portfolio holdings prior to public dissemination,



      unless such disclosure is made for legitimate  business  purposes and only
      if the Manager  believes that such disclosure will not be detrimental to a
      Fund's interest. A description of the policies and procedures with respect
      to the disclosure of each Fund's portfolio securities is set forth in each
      Fund's Statement of Additional Information.

Q4.   What is  Seligman's  policy with  regard to receipt of late trades  (i.e.,
      after 4:00 pm Eastern Time)?

A.    Seligman does not accept late trades  directly from Fund  shareholders  or
      prospective  shareholders.  The  large  majority  of  mutual  fund  trades
      submitted to Seligman  are from  broker-dealer  firms and other  financial
      intermediaries on behalf of their clients.  These  intermediaries  have an
      obligation  to ensure that trades  submitted to the  Seligman  Funds after
      4:00 pm on a trading  day for that day's net asset  value  were,  in fact,
      received  by those  entities by 4:00 pm on that day.  This  applies to all
      trades  from   intermediaries,   including   those  that  are  transmitted
      electronically to Seligman after the market closes.  Although the Seligman
      Funds and the Manager, like other mutual fund groups, cannot determine the
      time at  which  orders  received  through  financial  intermediaries  were
      placed,  the Manager  expects mutual fund trades  submitted to Seligman by
      financial   intermediaries   to  comply  with  all  applicable   laws  and
      regulations.  On a  periodic  basis,  Seligman  contacts  every  financial
      intermediary that offers, sells, or purchases shares of the Seligman Funds
      in order to remind it of its  responsibility  to have reasonable  policies
      and procedures to ensure that it complies with their legal and contractual
      obligations.  The  Manager  has found no  instances  of Fund  shareholders
      engaging in late trading  directly with the Seligman Funds.  Seligman will
      cooperate with and support any governmental or regulatory investigation to
      identify  and  hold  accountable  any  financial   intermediary  that  has
      submitted orders in violation of applicable laws or regulations.

Q5.   What is Seligman's policy regarding market timing?

A.    Seligman has policies and procedures in place to restrict  trades that, in
      its judgment,  could prove  disruptive in the  management of portfolios of
      the Seligman Funds. As part of the Manager's procedures,  the Manager will
      reject trades,  issues warning letters,  and prohibit accounts from making
      further  exchanges.  Since  September  2003,  when the  first  proceedings
      relating  to  trading  practices  within  the mutual  fund  industry  were
      publicly announced,  Seligman has taken additional steps to strengthen its
      policies and  procedures.  A general  description  of the Seligman  Funds'
      policies is set forth in each Fund's prospectus.  In addition,  Rule 22c-2
      was  adopted by the SEC under the  Investment  Company  Act of 1940 and is
      required to be fully implemented within the entire mutual fund industry on
      October  16,  2007.  This rule will  enable the  Seligman  Funds to obtain
      additional  information  relating to transactions by shareholders  holding
      their shares  through  financial  intermediaries,  thereby  enhancing  the
      ability to identify excessive trading in the Seligman Funds.

Q6.   Has Seligman conducted an internal review relating to market timing?

A.    The  Manager  completed  its  internal  review in the fall of 2003.  As of
      September  2003, the Manager had one arrangement  that permitted  frequent
      trading.  This  arrangement was in the process of being closed down by the
      Manager before September 2003. Based on a review of the Manager's  records
      for 2001 through 2003,  the Manager  identified  three other  arrangements
      that had permitted  frequent  trading in the Seligman Funds. All three had
      already been terminated prior to the end of September 2002. The results of
      the Manager's internal review were presented to the Independent  Directors
      of the Seligman  Funds.  In order to resolve  matters with the Independent
      Directors relating to the four arrangements,  the Manager in May 2004 paid
      approximately $75,000 to Seligman Global Growth Fund, $300,000 to Seligman
      Global  Smaller  Companies  Fund  and  $1.6  million  to  Seligman  Global
      Technology  Fund  in  recognition  that  these  global   investment  funds
      presented some potential for time zone arbitrage.  The amounts paid by the
      Manager  represented  less  than 1/2 of 1% of each such  Fund's  net asset
      value as of the date such payments were made. In addition, with respect to
      Seligman Communications and Information Fund and notwithstanding that time
      zone



      arbitrage  opportunities did not exist, the Manager, at the request of the
      Independent  Directors,  agreed to waive a portion of its management  fee,
      amounting  to five basis points  (0.05%) per annum,  for that Fund for the
      two-year period from June 1, 2004 to May 31, 2006.

Q7.   Does Seligman disclose its internal market timing control procedures?

A.    Seligman's market timing control  procedures are proprietary.  The Manager
      believes that disclosing these procedures will reduce their effectiveness.

Q8.   What new practices are being considered to prevent market timing abuses?

A.    As noted in response to Q5 above,  the full  implementation  of Rule 22c-2
      will  enhance the ability to identify  excessive  trading in the  Seligman
      Funds. On a periodic basis, Seligman contacts every financial intermediary
      that offers,  sells, or purchases shares of the Seligman Funds in order to
      inform it that it must have  reasonable  policies and procedures to ensure
      that it does not knowingly permit or facilitate  excessive  trading of the
      Seligman  Funds or knowingly  use or  facilitate  any methods  designed to
      disguise such trading in the Seligman Funds.

Q9.   Is Seligman involved with any federal or state  investigation  relating to
      market timing or late trading?

A.    Beginning in February 2004,  Seligman was in discussions with the New York
      staff  of the  SEC  and  the  Office  of the  New  York  Attorney  General
      ("Attorney  General") in connection with their review of frequent  trading
      in certain of the Seligman Funds. No late trading is involved. This review
      was apparently stimulated by Seligman's voluntary public disclosure of the
      arrangements  (described  in the response to Q6 above) in January 2004. In
      March 2005,  negotiations  to settle the matter were  initiated by the New
      York staff of the SEC.  After several  months of  negotiations,  tentative
      agreement  was  reached,  both with the New York  staff of the SEC and the
      Attorney  General,  on  the  financial  terms  of a  settlement.  However,
      settlement  discussions  with the Attorney General ended when the Attorney
      General  sought to  impose  operating  conditions  on  Seligman  that were
      unacceptable  to Seligman,  would have applied in perpetuity  and were not
      requested or required by the SEC. Subsequently,  the New York staff of the
      SEC  indicated  that,  in lieu of  moving  forward  under the terms of the
      tentative financial settlement,  the staff was considering recommending to
      the  Commissioners  of the SEC the  instituting of a formal action against
      Seligman.  Seligman  believes that any action would be both  inappropriate
      and unnecessary,  especially in light of the fact that Seligman previously
      resolved  the  underlying  issue  with the  Independent  Directors  of the
      Seligman Funds and made recompense to the affected Funds.

      Immediately after settlement  discussions with the Attorney General ended,
      the Attorney General issued subpoenas to certain of the Seligman Funds and
      their  directors.   The  subpoenas  sought  various  Board  materials  and
      information relating to the deliberations of the Independent  Directors as
      to the  advisory  fees paid by the Seligman  Funds to  Seligman.  Seligman
      objected to the Attorney  General's  seeking of such  information  and, on
      September 6, 2005,  filed suit in federal district court seeking to enjoin
      the Attorney General from pursuing a fee inquiry.  Seligman believes that,
      although the court  announced on September 26, 2007 that it would abstain,
      on procedural  grounds,  from deciding the issue,  the Attorney  General's
      inquiry is  improper  because  Congress  has vested  exclusive  regulatory
      oversight of investment company advisory fees in the SEC.

      At the end of September  2005,  the  Attorney  General  indicated  that it
      intended  to file an  action  at some  point in the  future  alleging,  in
      substance,  that  Seligman  permitted  other persons to engage in frequent
      trading other than the arrangements  described above and, as a result, the
      prospectus  disclosure  used  by  the  Seligman  Funds  is  and  has  been
      misleading.  On September 26, 2006, the Attorney General commenced a civil
      action in New York State  Supreme  Court  against  J. & W.  Seligman & Co.
      Incorporated,  Seligman



      Advisors,  Inc.,  Seligman Data Corp. and Brian T. Zino,  reiterating,  in
      substance,  the foregoing  claims and various other related  matters.  The
      Attorney  General  also  claims  that the fees  charged  by  Seligman  are
      excessive.  The  Attorney  General is  seeking  damages  and  restitution,
      disgorgement,  penalties and costs  (collectively,  "Damages"),  including
      Damages of at least $80 million  relating to alleged  timing  occurring in
      the Seligman Funds and  disgorgement  of profits and management  fees, and
      injunctive  relief.  Seligman  and Mr.  Zino  believe  that the claims are
      without merit and intend to defend themselves vigorously.

      Any resolution of these matters with  regulatory  authorities may include,
      but not be limited to, the relief sought by the Attorney  General or other
      sanctions or changes in  procedures.  Any Damages will be paid by Seligman
      and not by the Seligman  Funds. If Seligman is unsuccessful in its defense
      of these proceedings, it and its affiliates could be barred from providing
      investment advisory and other services, including serving as an investment
      adviser for the Seligman Funds and other registered  investment  companies
      and acting as  principal  underwriter  for the  Seligman  Funds.  If these
      results occur,  Seligman will seek exemptive relief from the SEC to permit
      it and its affiliates to continue to provide investment advisory and other
      services.  There  is no  assurance  that  such  exemptive  relief  will be
      granted.  Seligman  does not believe  that the  foregoing  legal action or
      other possible  actions should have a material  adverse impact on Seligman
      or  its  clients,  including  the  Seligman  Funds  and  other  investment
      companies  managed by it;  however,  there can be no  assurance of this or
      that these  matters and any related  publicity  will not result in reduced
      demand  for  shares  of the  Seligman  Funds  and  such  other  investment
      companies or other adverse consequences.

Q10.  Does Seligman have any market timing arrangements at the current time?

A.    Market timing arrangements in the Seligman Funds have been prohibited.  In
      addition,  Seligman has strengthened  existing  controls to discourage and
      help prevent  market  timing.  As noted in response to Q5 above,  the full
      implementation  of  Rule  22c-2  will  enhance  the  ability  to  identify
      excessive trading in the Seligman Funds.

Q11.  Have any  employees  been  disciplined  in  connection  with the Manager's
      overall internal review?

A.    One employee has left Seligman.