Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1857-08-01
The Tax on Merchants Capital.


- -----=-=--=-==-=-=---==
The Tax on Merchants Capital.
We invite the attention of readers, and espe-
cialy of merchants to the following correspondence
between Messrs. Rodman and Donnell on behalf of
the merchants of Washington, and the Treasurer of
the State.
The error into which many of the merchants have
falen is that of supposing that the tax of onethrd
one and five per cent. in the cases specified in
ton a of the law. is imposed the "goods
wares and merchandise themselves, and not on the
capital employed in purchasing them. The tao is
the capital, and not on the goods Nor is any dis,
elimination made between "goods, wares ard mer-
chandze" purchased out of and within the State
The act it seems to us, is clear; and we think the
Treasurer in his reply to Messrs Rodman and Dom
NELL has given it its true construction. In some in
stances, it is true, the tax is quite heavy and there
may be force the Treasurer observes, in what is
said to the policy of the law; yet that cannot af
feet the construction which the law itself should pro-
perly bear. After all, however, the burden will fall
on the consumer for it is not to be supposed that
the merchant will himself incur the loss in profits
which must easue.
1t is highly important that every revenue law
should be plain and clear, and so framed as to oper-
ate equally possible upon all. The present law
is the result of reflection, of anxious consideration
and of no inconsiderable financial SKILL yet, it must
be confessed it is in respects obscure and does
not operate equally upon all interests and subjects.
Some of the defects of the present law, and in
deed the most striking of them, to be attributed,
not to the Finance Committee, but to amendments
made to the bill during its progress through the two
Houses. 1t so happened also, at both the sessions
of 1854 and 1856, that the Finance Committee was
hindered and delayed in its labors by the want of
documentary information in relation to the financial
condition of the State; and owing mainly to this,
the bills reported at too late periods in
the sessions to permit that full and careful consider
alton and analysis which their Importance demanded
The documentary information referred to- is contain
ed for the most part in the Treasurer's and Comp
trollers Reports and these we think, should be or
dered to be printed in ADVANCE well for the year
Immediately preceding for the former year. and
laid on the tables of members on the first day of
the session.
But there never was, and there never will be, a
perfect revenue law and the more specifics any law
of this kind may contain the imperfect it will
be. The true system is the ad valoren systeIn-that
is, taxation according to value. This system was
recommended by Gov Reid in his annual message
to the General Assembly in 1852; and in our opin-
ion the day is not very distant when will be adopt
ed in this State. Let the people think of it. But
we have already detained our readers longer than
We intended from the correspondence above refer
red to:
WASHINGTON, N c., July 9Th, 1857.
H., r. L.
merchants in this place to give our opinion on the
construction of the Oath of the revised act ch
81, of the acts of 1856. We feel difficulty in do.
ing So because literal Interpretation would be SO
Injurious that we cannot believe the Legislature ev-
er intended such result We have suggested,
therefore, that you should be consulted SO that if
the effect be injurious should at least be uniform
throughout the State and the pressure borne equal
ly by ALL Please inform officially of the views of
the government on the following cases:
l. If A sells turpentine or cotton of his own pro.
duction in this State to B. and sells to G. who ships
and sells it abroad; are both and bound to pay
the tax of of per cent, the turpentine cot
ton! And is this so, regardless of how many times
1t may be sold before expectation?
z 1t A, jobber, imports goods from N. York, and
sells to B, who retails to the consumer are both A
and bound to pay the tax of of per cent?
You will perceive that these substantially
the same the first relating goods produced in the
State, and exported for consumption; and the Sec
ond, to those imported for consumption
1T the first is answered afirmatively, it will go
very far to break up the internal trade in our own
staples. If the second is answered in like manner
will break up the obbing business large one in
our eastern, and probably the interior towns, and
compel every retailer to buy his goods abroad Fur.
ther if we had any foreign import trade such legis
lation would seem aimed directly to break it up as
ports of all other States would have preference
over our own to the amount of the TAX.
g. Ii A sells goods imported from n Y. and takes
turpent'ne or cotton iE payment, is he purcha-
ser OF both his N. Y. goods and of the turpentne,
oound TO pay tax on the tao sums?
II this is answered afrmatively, it will break up
the barter business and produce infinite inconve.
nence.
4. Do sections "a, 26 and 81 impose anu tax on
the dealings OF merchants prior to list JULY ls57?-
Are not the taxes then payable by them. antcinato
ry of their business from LIST July 1857 to LIST Iuv
1885, and applicable only to their dealings in that
interval?
3. Does sect. 81 apply only to those who have not
oeen dealing in merchandise before I'd July, 1857, or
also to those who were so dealing before LIST july
1897, and "open store after LIST July 1857 bv con.
tinuing their dealing?
If sec. "a imposes tax, not on property but on
comduct Ito wit, purchases) prior to its passage it
would seem to be an &c post tact0 law and more in
the nature Of confscation than revenue act, and
Its constitutionality very doubtful.