Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1856-01-17

special taxes we're imposed which hoWeVsr'
produced but little revenue.
10 l84e a change Of our financial system
occurred. Annual deficits compelled the Leg
isature TO return to what should be tbs prima-
ry object Of ell tax laws. to Eit the collection
Of revenue. Previous errors we're then inpart
Temedied. bat mani very Asgrant ones were
continued from il-advised paruality. A new
tendency was, however. inaugeTated and the
rule Of equality IN taxation gained constant
strength, 10 spite Of opposing interests. The
Constitutional Convention met under these au-
spices. sni the tax rule established 10 the
Constitution was the result. Ils great pria-
ciple is TIE abrOga.iOn Of all arbitrary taxstOn.
Man, as such, bis business. occupation, aud
profession. are no longer subject 70 legislative
caprice. Property is the measure and basis Of
taxation. 4 few exemptions for objects Of al.
most universal interest are authorized. but in
such manner that they can never become in
dependent of The popular will.
The first General Assembly under the new
Constitution passed such tax laws as we're sup.
posed to be in accordance with its require
ments. Differences Of construction arose, as was
to be expected, and we're very properly refer.
red to the Court whose decision has been ac-
quiesced in by the great body Of the people.
It is not denied that the rule referred to has
produced occasionally some hardships. but it is
equally true that these hardships would be scar
cely observable, il, instead Of supporting ex-
emptions aud deductions, we would make the
grand duplicate represent the entire wealth OF
the State II is estimated that no less than three
hundred millions of properly ia the stale esca.
ped taxation.
A careful examination Of the question will
suggest many reasons adverse TO any precjpi-
tate or unadvised changes in our tax laws. All
agree chat pr opeTty shall be taxed where il is
bY uniform rule, that the resident and non
resident owner shall pay his due proportion,
and that this proportion shall include State.
county, township and city taxes. The tax is on
the property within toe State. and not on its
inhabitants The lien for The the tax is not upon
the owner, bat OF the property. l. makes no
difference whether. the property is owned By
dents or non siIen!s Possession, lad no
ownership, is the point Of inquiry. A New.
York merchant doing business in our State
will not be asked whether his capital is his own
or borrowed. The whole stock found in his
possession is the measure OF his taxation Oar
own merchants are treated precisely in the
sam way. A different rule would obviously
work serious injulice 10 Ohio mercants. bee ,use
with deductions for credits, foreign merchants
might trade in our State without paying one
dollar of taxes. Again, Vr ,inials own lands 10
Ohio. They owe a portion OF the pu chase
money either 10 one or the other of these States.
Ea,n IL - in vubi tha .nI
lies lose the right to levys fair proportion of
taxes upon the lands in question? The rule for
deduction for debts would evidently work end
less confusion Take the case Of our own clil-
zens, many OF whom own both real and perso-
nal property in more than one locality, and are
indebted for part of the same;-where shall
the deduction be made. Shall 1t be at their
own option?
The doctrine so frequently advanced thai.
man should be taxed only on what he has
and not upon what he has not" does not in
fact applJ to our system of taxation. Our du'
plcate Ii . be visible property in the State,
andNot the persons. A large number of the i :
habitsnts of the State are not upon it, while il
contains the names of many who reside be
vond its limits. This is sufficient answer to
such avowals.
Simplicity, both of detail and principle, is an
important element in the construction OF al
revenue laws. Evasiols smultiply with exemp-
tious and deductions, and The individual tai
payer will be apt, through mental reservation,
to enlarge the sphere for which the legislator
has set him the example He. too has favour
ite objects which he thinks it hard to tax. Tht
more generally we adopt the principle OF tax
ing equally all property, the equitable and
fair will be its effects, Their unequal operation
rather than their amount, makes taxes oppres-
sive. In our State. tax inequalities are neces-
sarily unjust. Every dollar that is remtted to,
or withheld by, one person, must be made up
and paid by other. The amount of tax is not
reduced BY suffering prof. ely TO escape; the
/ only result is that he taxes are uniuslIy lev
led. Exemptions and deductions but mar TIE
uniformity and equality OF our tax laws, and
for this reason if Tor no other. there should bt
MS few allowed as possible.
An equal tax on property based on these
rules, with few exemptions and deductions
leave very little opportunity for indviiua
evasioDs. Its assessments aud valuations are
more easily perfected. they may be made
quicker aud yet be far less inqujsitora. Su
a system must eventually recommend itself t(
all as the one best adapted to our circumstance;
as q people. Under it the measure of taxation
would be based upon a general prineiple-thaI
brinciplewoud be enforced By the people them
selves. They would watch and expose individ-
ual failures to list, and thereby carry out the
honest object of the law. Then the people viii
soon habituate themselves to look for and de-
tect the true cluse of any increase in the taxes
and reformatory efforts, being ghtly directed
would always be successful,
The preceding remarks are not intended Il
preclude all amendments to Oul tax W. On tn
contrary. it is admitted that several might b
made which would render them more efficient
The assessments aud valuation of persona
property, especially. should be accelerated S
that little if any property coald be listed twice
There is no reason why, by proper sub bdvisioI
| it could not be done within few days. Thi
would not incease the expense. The phraseolo