Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1854-04-05

Since the decision of the Supreme Court, de-
claring the tenth section Of the tax law which
allows the lister to deduct his indebtedness from
the gross amount of his moneys and credits, un-
CONSTITUTIONAL there has been strong effort made
in certain quarters to get up renewed agita.
ton on the question, with view to secure
the abandonment of the present system. The
object of this effort is, to restore this privilege Of
making deductions, or exemptions, not only to in
dividuals but to corporations. Mfr. BAKER, the
member of the Legislature from Darke county
has introduced bill in the House, to repeal this
tenth section, upon which he has made speech,
taking the ground that such deductions would be
unjust and unequal. We find the following ex-
tract of his speech, illustrating his position upon
this point, in the Statesman acd give it place in
our columns:
Now, let US examine the practical operation
of this law, for the last fifteen years, and let us
see who it is that has reason to complain and zee
if it should not come from the other side of the
question. | will suppose case. A. and B. 90
to the Franklin Bank of Columbus, and each one
borrows ten thousand dollars. A. loans his, il
Ds
in cattle or land The assessor calls on A., when
he very politely informs him, that he has ten
thousand dollars loaned at interest but he owes
the Franklin Bank ten thousand dollars Aud
thereby he can take the deduction, and escapes
the tax duplicate. But he calls upon B., and he
informs him that he has ten thousand invested
in different kinds of property lands, ETC., but he,
too, owes the Franklin Bank ten thousand dollars.
and wants to make the deduction from his valua-
ton; but he is informed, "No; you do not belong
to this first class of gentlemen. 1t is true the
tenth section of the tax law allows the lister, in
making up the amount of his moneys and credits,
to deduct his indebtedness from his moneys and
credits
Whilst am on this subject, Twill give few
more examples. Let A. and B, 60 to an old farm
er, and each one borrow five hundred dollars for
the term of six years, at six per cent. interest,
and each one lays his money out in cattle, and
commences feeding for the spring market A.
sells his cattle few days before the assessor
calls on him, and has made fine profit, and has
the money in his drawer, ready for another trade;
he informs the assessor that he has five hundred
dollars in his drawer, but that he owes an old
farmer five hundred dollars, and thereby he can
make the deduction, and does not pay one far
thing. But here is b. who has not been so for
tunate in making his sale, and has his five hun
dred dollars worth of cattle on hand. Now what
is the consequence! Why, B. has to give in his
five hundred dollars worth of cattle, notwithstand-
ing he owes five hundred dollars to the same old
farmer; yet he can make 40 deduction for the
only reason that he has not been able to trans
form himself into person who is the owner of
moneys or credits
81 will suppose another case. A. and B, go to
the city of Cincinnati, and each one buys one
thousand dollars worth of goods, on one years
credit. A. comes home and is very lucky, has
turned his entire stock of goods into moneys or
credits, thereby avoids the payment of taxes by
taking the deduction of his indebtedness but B. ,on
his return home with one thousand dollars worth
of goods, takes sick and dies, and in consequence
of that, his goods remain unsold, the widow or
administrator is compelled to list them for taxa
ton, and pay accordingly, although she owes eve
ry dollar ofthem, whilst A. avoids it,