The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1845-06-14
OSCAR.
THE SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY.
EDITED BY ]. Il. MORRIS.
WOODSFlELD. OHIO:
SATURDAY, JUNE IA, ls45.
THE TAX LAW.

views of the tax law; and in so doing we hope we
may be understood by every person under whose
notice this article may fall. We have not such
confidence in our talents as to believe that we Can
change the views of an individual who is deter
mined TO stake his whole political reputation in
defence of this law, or who is acilling to sink or
sv i'm with it. But we had thought that we had
been sufficiently plain in our exposition of its obi
business and unjustness as to require but little fur
ther from us on this subject. In this we probably
were mistaken.
Before entering upon the discussion of this sub
iect we take this method of correcting an error in
our article OF last week; which occurred, not from
a misconceptlon of the law, but through haste in
the preparation of the manuscript The error is in
the following sentences: "What portion Of the
surplus products of the nabobs in the rich canal
counties in the hands of the trader escapes taxa
ton? The seattle on thousand hills" and plains,
and the hogs of the rich and fertile valleys" The
wording of these sentences might lead the reader
to suppose that drO0Ts. under the new law, were
exempt from taxation-such is not the fact
Those only are exempt who buy horses, cattle,
hogs, or sheep to feed or improve in value, and
those who purchase live hogs beef cattle, or sheep
to be slaughtered by the buyer himself. Those
acquainted with the manner of dong business in
the western part of this State, know that the gra-
ziers and feeders, as general thing, send their
cattle and hogs to market themselves, thereby es-
Gaping taxaton and if that market is within the
bounds of Ohio, the purchaser, if he slaughters
them himself. also escapes the payment of taxes;
SO that the sentences supposed to be erroneous
may be said to be strictly correct
In reading Mr.. Archbold's article in to-day's
paper, we find he denies making such remarks as
are attributed to him by the Belmont Chronicle
There is then an issue between Mr. Arcbhold and
the editor of the Chronicle which they must settle
between themselves-''we wash our hands OF it.
AS we do not feel that the remarks Of Mr. Arch
bold in relation to the "ordinary licentiousnoss of
the news paper press" are applicable to US, we
pass them by. But we cannot pass by what we
conceive to be an almost entire evasion of the
question at issue fetween Mr.. Archbold and our-
the question of his 'sleepless diligence" to the
decision of his constituents. Is the law Just? Is
it equitable? Does it operate upon the people in
different portions ofthe State equally? These are
questions which we wish TO have settled and not
who has betrayed his friends or been guilty of
"treachery' 10 his party.
If the "new tax law is not whig measure in
any partizan serse ofthe word" then the whig
party, who had large majority in both branches Of
the last legislature, is not responsible for any Of its
acts
1t might te supposed that we had charged Mr..
Archbold "with breach of party obligations.
We charge no man "with breach Of party obi.
cations" Men are not usually under such obi.
cations; they are under obligations, however, to
their constituents; whose will, we believe. had
Mr.. Archbold carried out he would now have
been saved the necessity of defending his course.
"Our previous training or principles has taught
us that it is ars,ocratic and federal and whiggsh"
to permit s'merchants and money lenders" to e.
cape taxation on one half of their capital; while
the farmers Of this county are taxed on the more
than full average value OF their horses aud catte!!
We now come to the most singular Of all Mr..
Archbold's interpretations of this law. We give
his own words
"As to the exemption Of tho capital employed
in the purchase Of live stock from taxation under
this law, submit to my fellow citizens the follow
ing reasons. We might tax that kind Of capital in
the hands of or own fellow citizens, but we could
mr. tov tbn hanI ,cct tha frprn oil tha
border States, such as Pennsylvania, Virginia,
Kentucky, Indiana and Michigan, who come and
20 in few weeks. If the act contained such
feature as this should give up its defence"
In all sincerity we call upon Mr. Archbold to
he sun shines, so certain does the law tax The cap
tai of our drouers. Now for the proof: The
fourth section Of the law reads thus:
"Every individual, company or firm that shall
Ie engaged in the business OF purchasing and SELL
ng personal property of any kind or description,
or the purpose of making profit thereby, or that
hall purchase personal property cfany description
,ther than domestic animals, with the view to in
;rease the value thereof, by any process of manu-
refining or otherwise improving the
,aluo thereof for the purpose Of selling the same
It an increased price, shall be considered and held
% ne enBdpcu III HeTCdHtlle DuellcSS VI Uduc,
within the meaning ofhis act;'' sc.
Mr.. Archbold is certainly aware that the words
'Other than domestic animals" apply only to that
'art Of this section succeeding the word "Or,
which we have ilalicised. The sentence being
sjoined by the word "or," the exception in the
econd clause cannot apply to the first. Tti GER
ainly the obvious meaning and intention of the law
o tax droves; and we are sustained in our opinion
y the Auditor ofState. He says:
"The capital employed by dr0ueS, and persons
ngaged IN the business ofbuying and selling horses
attle, hogs and sheep, which are not purchased to
e fed or improved IN value by the purchaser, but
aerriy to be sold again, in the same condition in
VhIch they were purchased, is capital in trade,
within the meaning Of the first clause of the Ath
ection The medium amount of such property in
os,cssion Of the trader during the year, which has