The Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1852-1853, 1853-03-02
Taxation---Eanks.

who signs himself 3D." to the following ar
ticle on Bank taxation, from the Ohio Pa
triot' Itmay be after reading this article,
our worthy friend, will never set up another
poor, Pitiful plea for the Harrison Branch"
Mr., ID. Should remember tn speech's
he made in the Court House, before the vote
was taken on subscribing 100000 to the
capital stock of the Steubenville and Indi-
ana railroad. He then said that the "Bank"
would pay arery large proportion ofthe Rail
road tax, but now, according to,his communi-
cation, he thinks the bank should pay but
little, if any, of the railroad tax. "Consis-
tency thou art a jewell
But to the Patriots article:
For more than eight months past, the
Bankers have been busy circulating the
false assertions in regard to the Tax Law, of
1889. Our readers can easily understand
why.
An examination ofthe law, will show 20 the
satisfaction of any who are willing to be sat-
isfed, that Merchants, Manufacturers, Me-
chanics, Bankers, Exchange Brokers, Stock
Jpbbers, Incorporated Banks, and Lands,
are all taxed alike-upon the same princi-
pie, so far as relates 10 the n~on-deGuction Of
200 dollars-and SO far as relates to the nom
deduction ofdebtS, or liabilities against them.
If a man owrs one hundred acres of land,
1t must be taxed at its full valuation, with
out any deduction. A Merchant, Manu-
f~act1rer, &c, must be taxed on the full
amount Ct the monthly average value, of his
"Stockin trade" without any DEDUCTION
So it is with the Incorporated Bank. 1t is
not, as has been falsely. asserted, taxed on
its 'icirculation"-nor on its cd eposits-nor
OF "mpHeys" it may hold for the redemp-
ton Of any of its issues--nor any moneys,
whatsoever, which it may have on hand,
unless it is deriving "proht' therefrom.--
This law expressly provides, in favor, of
Banks. Thus giving them a decided advan.
tage over either of the other classes of prop
erty above mentioned. Merchants stock,
Manufacturing, Mechanical stock, or Lands,
may, on account Of depreciation, be not
worth one-half the valuation yet no deduc-
ton can be made; they may yield no profit, ;
yet the valuation is the same and the tax the
same. Not SO, with the Incorporated Bank.
1t is taxed on nothing, except its ~"actual
value in money" and on nothing except that
upon which it has receivedg or is to receive,
'proft' or which it has used or employed"
and IS entitled thereon to fecelve or has
received, "interest." With this distinction
in their favor, it seems to have been the pol
icy Of the Legislature to treat the Bankers
property the same as property in Lands,
and as other SPECIES Of property, above mep-
toned, in the business Of taxation. If a
Banker uses money, as "merehandize,"
as is the fact, why not tax his average "s;ock
in trade" the same as that Of the
Merchant, Mechanic, Broker, &c? The
policy is right in each instance. 1t is the
policy of necessity. No other mode can be
adopted. If Merchants, Manufacturers, and
Land owners, were permitted TO deduct from
their respective properties, the debts and
liabilities agrinSt the same, how long would
1t be before there would cease To be Il dol
lar of Merchandise, Of Manufactures stock,
or an acre Of Land, in the State subject to
taxation? All our lands would be covered
with membranes exceeding their value,
and every Merchant, and Manufacturer, and
Stock Jobber, and Broker, &c., would BE-
doing business upon borrowed capital, and
though they might, in the aggregate, be
using in trade, merchandise, property, and
money, amounting to 90, OOO, 900 of dollars,
in the Stale, not one dollar Of tax could be
assessed against the same ! ! So it would
be with incorporated Banks, if any other
mode than that prescribed by law, were a.
dopted for their assessment. See Sec. 49,,
page IA, General Laws Of 1859. And vet
the Bankers complain What impudencc
Or, venality! Cali it what they please
Why there is not a Merchant, Mechanic,
Broker, Jobber, or Land owner, in the State,
but what can, as our readers will preceive,
make a much stronger case for restraining
the tax gatherer, than can any Bank. Shall
our courts give encouragement to this Bank
resistance, upon the false pretence of inc
quality Of taxation, when the owners of
more than three fourlhs of all the other
property In the Stale, can show much bet
ter grounds for resistance--but still they
pay their taxes, like good citizens, and do
importune the Courts to overturn the
Law and the Constitution? We say en-
phatlcaIly that the "stock i'll trade" of
Banks, is not taxed so much as that Of Nfer.
chants, Manufacturers, &c, nor so much as
Lands. The Tax Law does not come up to
the constitutional requisilition, so far as Banks
are concerned. See Sec. 3, Article l2, Of
Constitution.
1t may be that some of the Banks, through
Iggn orsnce ofthe Law, or wilfully to excite
clamor in their favor, have reported a great
amount, for taxation, than the law re-
qulres. # So the fault is their own, and
it furnishes no ground for setting aside the
Law, or the Constitution. 1t might give
them a right to ask a court to. correct their
own error, nothing more.
There is scarcely a Bank in Ohio, but
what is daily violating its charter; by pay
ing out "foreign Bank paper" which is GOA
to the express provisions of the char
This has been carried on SO far as to
give us a currency which is a disgrace, and
shame, to our people. We have
circulating for money, but who
the value of them. Is this the "home
currency" P omised us, when the Bank
Law was passed? Shame! Shame !! We
said then, and experience has tested the
oft, that instead of giving us a "home
currency" the more Banks were made, the
greater would be onr "foreign circulation"
and the less would be our ''home ercuJa.