The Lancaster gazette. (Lancaster, Ohio) 1846-1852, 1847-10-08
Moro Of the Tax Law.


gued upon the presumption that the
Eagles figures are correct and employ
ing them, have arrived at conclusions,
which we shall now reach in a more gen
eral way. Take the subject up as you
please, with a determination 10 seek the
truth, and you can arrive at no other con-
clusion than that the principle ofthe Tax
Lawi is a correct one andthatit lis details are,
just and equal.
Personal Property Of fairfield County,
State and County Tdr.
In ls45 value $749, 781 at 10 mills 1914 Is
In ls47 $l,5l7, 971 at 50 +" 1928 80
1t will be seen that the difference is in
favor of 1S45 by $l,o1S SO. 1t will also
be seen that the amout of taxable proper
ty, in 1S47, is more than twice that of
1S45. And if we go back to 1874, the
last year of the Locofoco law, We will
find that the mount brought on the list
this year is treble.
But as we have said before, it is not a
fair comparison, when we take county
and State tax, as our Commissioners have
raised the county tax and this addition is
not the result of the tax law. We then
take the State tax alone.
In 1845, value $749,78 att mills $5.248 46
In l847, " $l,5l7, 97t at % mills AHA 40
This leaves a difference in favor of 1845 of ST.
O74 O4.
Real Estate, State and County Tar.
In I845, value So, 495, 492 at 10 mills $780, AL 80
In l847, value 5000, O85 at So mills 1923 SO
Leaving a difference between 1916
and 1S47 of SLAP SO; or by means of
raising u county tax, the tax on Real
Estate, for State and county purposes, is
that many dollars higher in 1s47 than
E in 1916. But W. again take the State
Tax alone, and here we will see the in
justice of those, who wish to sadI.e the
acts of the Locofoco Commissioners of
this county upon the Tax Law.
In 1915, value 50, 405 400 at 7 mills $I7, 468 "A
In l847, value s 5,898, O85 at q mills 1925 70
Difference, l,248 II
Thus it will be seer that, leaving out
Of the account the demands ofour Com
m~issioners, the Wing managers of the
State Finances. ask of the Real Estate of
this county $1,24S II LESS in 1S47
than in 1916. And as a matter of course,
had our Appraisers made the same pro-
portionate valuation upon the Real Es-
tate of the county, each taxpayer would
have been benefited by his share of the
reduction. That they did not do it, we
repeat again is not the fault of the Tax
Law.
But even under the appraisement, how
does the law operate upon the Farmers?
1t will be seen that the State asks less
both from Personal and Real property.
Now how is the decrease distributed or
who is benefited by it2
Under the old law, the value of lands
e was 81 .939, 092; and the State tax $l3,573 Ga
Under the new law, the value is
S. $50 and the tax ............ 1888 20
3 Making adherence to the Farmer of $685.:
D Very well. Under the new law, the
State demands, from the county person :
atty, $l,074 O4 less than in 1916 and who
is benefited most by thisl AS near as
we can come to it, the different towns in
the county, leaving out of consideration
all the facts mentioned in another article
about investment in Banks &c. pay this
0 much more tax, this year, than in 1916,
making a difference to the farmer of over
So, 1000. Now how stands the account
Tax law to Farmers DR..
To additional OH Real Estate -.......$3 1886.
CIR. BY decrease on personally $500. 1000
Thus the Farmers of our county are
indebted to the Tax Law in the sum o.
1,615.
;, Now how stands the other account?
i Tax Law to Towns DR..
To additional on personally -..-... 81 ,074
Or. By decrease on Real Estate .....1.633
Thus the Towns are indebted to the
Tax Law in the sum of $3.50.
But here comes up another objection
r The State receives more money from tax
es than heretofore and yet demands les'
from this county. Why is it?
" Decrease of State Tax, on Personal 1914 O.
Do. do on Real......1.243 7,
u Total decrease. .$2,s22 4
Here is an important fact. This coun
ty pays for State purposes 1892 II
LESS than it did in 1916 and yet the
W State Revenue is larger and out of the
whole tax, it is the intention of adding tC
-, the sinking Funk. The reason is OBJ
vious. We have but few capitalists ii
a this county and from these tho chief in
crease is drawn. We have no one, who
ID can strictly be called a rich man. But ii
other towns and other counties, Their,
" are such men and from those towns ant
counties the State draws a larger tax.