Independent Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Miss.) 1842-1844, 1843-05-27

sy task 10 preserve cquaiy !" io'SihS
and al the same time to overcome the &c
neral repugnance to The payment of take
in any shape, repugnance arising NOR
from an apprehension that their avails wi
not be wisely supplied, than from an un
willingness on the part oil the people
sustain their Government by the necessar
contributions. All must agree that take
should be imposed with fair and full re
ference TO the advantages derived, from tn,
existence of good government, by thos,
who paw them. Those advantages may
in general terms be justly described as re
suItinr from ample security in the enjoy
ment Of our personal rights, and rights o.
property, with adequate safeguards agains
internal commo,ion and foreign aggres
sion. In respect TO the immunities Of the
person, and civil and religious freedom,
the interest, as well a. the immediate I'D.
vantages of ali are equal. Not so with the
other privileges secured to US by our free
government. The unavoidable disparity
in the pecuniary condition of our citizens,
makes degree of tene6l they respective.
" derive from the maintenance Of an eff.
eient government over property and the
rights Of property essentially dlfferent.-
The modes Of raising revenue allowed TO,
and adopted by, the State governments, are
generally greduate1 by this disparity. III
the results are not always equitable, the
fault, it is believed, viii in most cases be
found in their action upon the principle,
rather than in the principle itself. The
RICH, 10 raise revenue for its support, by
the Constitutes, subjected to the exclusive
control of the Federal Government. This
right, subjec, to The limitations imposed by
the grant, was given to it for that Purpose,
and has been freely exer;ed by j. since its
establishment. 1. would affjrd me much
pleasure 10 be able 10 say that the exercise
Of this power has borne o, equally upon all
Glasses Of tho people, however unequal in
their pecuniary conditions as the taxes i'm
posed by the State Governments. But
this cannot With truth be said. Nor is tho
inequality uuavoidably resulting from the
federal mode Of collecting taxes, a new
discovery. 1t was foreseen and objected
to when the power wa, conferred, az an
evil inherent to the system, which could
not fail to show itself in its operation, and
The injustice Of which no form Of legisla-
fion, however it might be made TO mitigate
could ever be able to remove. The aiyo-
Gates Of the system were, Notwithstanding,
reconciled 70 it by q belief, no doubt sin.
cerely entertained, that the inequalities
which il was feared would result from the
collection Of duties upon imported articles,
would be prevented by tho fact, that the
would be in prop ,r,ion to the
means Of the Consumer. 1t was upon this
ground that the principle was defended
That this expectation has not been realiz
ID, is undenilbly true. There ore bu,
ew, if any, who ccnnot, In thoir immedi.
lie vicinity, point out nunerou. instances
n which poor men with large families,
IRE actually obliged to pay more for the
Import of the Federal Co. eminent, than
theirs who are in afIluen, circumstances,
ut are either without, or have sma. leT fam
les; and few if any couIlervallIng exam
les are TO be found. At the same time,
be great body Of wealth invested in incor-
GRATED or associated companies, and in
onds and notes, entirely escape federal
Axation. The mass Of the people, seem,
nevertheless TO prefer this mode Of coll
Getting the revenue. Paying their taxes
q tn form Of az increased price upon the
they buy, their contribution
osses, in their estimation, much Of the 1
dun that would be attached 10 it il Sc
cred from the price Of the article, and
onverted into tax BY name, rs it is in
act. 1t also wears the appearance Of u
oluntary contribution, although It's pay.
nent is for the most part as unavoidable Is :
compulsory imposition would he. 1t is
Imported, too, by the odlum which was
t,ached to the imposition Of direct taxes ,
aany years since, for purposes which were
ot approved by the people, and by the
act that in most Of the States the taxes {
re direct; rendering it for that reason de. i
irable to substitute some other mode Of ,
aising revenue for the Federal Govern.
,ent. These and other considerations
ave given to the impost a preference on
be public mind which would render the
IMPOSITION Of direct taxes in time Of peace
Exceedingly odious, and have produced as
rea' degree Of unanimity in favor Of
lrif for revenue as ever can be expected
pom public question. Of the great mass
{ opponents 70 protective tariff there is
OF so far as know, a single State OF even
Istrict, that has taken ground against
,venue tariff.
Let Us now for moment look At the ad. q
,ntages which the manufa curing inter-
II, ADORE any other, derives fom tariff =
aposed for revenue only. The FIRST tariff
II passed in 1889, and all those that fol.
we'd IL hetween that neriod and the war