Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1846-09-25

The wearing apparel Of every person and
family, which shall not b. construed TO include
watches Of any kind.
All articles Of food provided by the bead Of
the family 10 sustain the members thereof Pro.
yided, that no person from whom any compensa.
ton for board or lodging is received, or expected
10 be received, shall be considered a member Of
a family, within the meaning Of this act
All animals not specified in the ninth section Of
this act.
Farming Implements, actually used for farm.
ing purposes, owned by any person engaged in
the business Of farming, which shall not be held
to include road wagons, or wagons used princi-
pally for other than farming purposes.
Mechanics tools, not exceeding in value one
hundred and fifty dollars, owned by any person
actually engaged in carrying on any mechanical
trade or profession.
The head Of every family shall be entitled 10
hold, exempt from taxation, one COW, eight sheep
four hogs, unless he shall have other property,
over one hundred dollars in value, subject to
taxation.
These are exempt from taxation and from list
ment. Now if these men have any regard for
their reputation and we know they have, they
should without delay plead non est fachrm, to
this address, and file their solemn affidavit that
they never signed it, or if they did thatthey were
ignorant at the time, ofits contents.
They then give US "a few words about cred
its,"-and here they display much legal lore,
and refined reasoning.
They say, "the idea of making credits spe.
cies of property is udcrous. 1t is not tangi.
ble,' it cannot be subject of ownership, as it is
neither animate nor inanimate, and is but mere
state of relation" Now, at least one of these
gentlemen is presumed to have some knowledge
of law, having served as an associate Judge in
our court, and having read the law for two years,
according to the certificate of some attorney, and
is in fact, ALMOST A MEMBER OF THE BAR-His
opinion would seem to be worth something. We
fear, however, such an opinion or dicta, in rea.
uon to the nature of property, as that expressed
here, would not gain for him much CREDIT either
as ia'cyer or as Judge. Our "frst lessons"
IN law taught us that PROPERTY in chattels person.
al, may be either in possession or else il is in dc-
ton; that this latter species of properly is "such
whereof a man hath not the occupation, but
merely bare right to occupy the thing in ques.
ton, whence the thing so recoverable is called a
thing or chose in action. Thus money due on
bond, is q chose in action. If man promises
or covenants with me to do an act and fails in it,
whereby suffer damage, the recompense for
this damage is a chose in action" Black. Com.
Butts Sir William Blackstone is great blockhead,
in the view of this democratic committee, and
his opinion too "ludicrous" to merit considera.
tion. We are inclined to think that this species
ofpropertyi consideredb by mostpeople, VALUABLE
PROFITABLE, and if valuable and profitable, it
should be subject to taxation like other property
Let us see in what this injustice or hardship of
taxing credits consists. An Industrious, intelli-
gent man, brought up to the occupation of farm
ing, is destitute Of capital to enable him to apply
his skill, and must remain idle ordepend upon en-
ployment as a common laborer for livelihood.
friend offers to sell to him a small farm team.
and the necessary utensils on credit, and thus en-
able him to unite his skill with his labor The
bargain is struck; the farmer passes his note to the
vendor fortwo thousand dollars, with interest atthe
rate of six per cent. His labor alone is worth
one dollar day; united with his skill as a farm
er it is worth twodolarsa day. This addition of
one dollar day, or three hundred dollars year,
he realizes from his credit alone. OF thishe paws
one hundred and twenty dollars interest, the price
of his capital; and he has left net profit upon the
farm-his capital-his credit-of one hundred
and eighty dollars. The farm is worth to him
$3.50: the note is worth tothe holder 1890. The
farm, say these men, alone should be taxed
Why! Because it is property, valuaJle, and prof.
liable. But the note-this "chose an action
which LAWYERS call PROPERTY, appears TO be with
in few dollars as vALUABLE-as PROFITABLE as
the FARM. Is there any good reason why ii
should not be taxed also! We can see none.
1t seems like folly, however, to undertake an
illustration of that which must be clear and pal
pable to every unprejudiced understanding. Ac-
cordng to the reasoning of these sages? such men
as Simeon Jennings and certain members of this
committee, whose wealth consists principally of
notes, bonds, and mortgages, should entirely es-
cape taxation, and the FARMER ALONE SHOULD
BEAR THE BURTHEN.
But the great bug-bear, or in the language of
the committee "the most excepionable feature in
the whole law" they find in the tenth section,
(Which excludes from the tax list, and conse-
quently from taxation, the capital stock of any
company or corporation WHICH PAYS TAX ON
ITS INCOME, PROFITS, OR DIVIDENDS Verify!
what wicked law, to exempt from taxation, PRO-
PERTY TAXED BY SOME OTHER LAW! All! says the
committee, but "while the banker paws only six
per cent. on the PROFITS, which he flches from
the bank-ridden neonle the rast of copopoup;t,