Lewistown gazette. [volume] (Lewistown, Pa.) 1843-1944, 1858-02-04

2aThe Lewistown Gazette. with Its usual regard fo
shippers content pay the tonnage tax We used NJ
snch languages We proved. satisfactorily, we think tina
content to So why repeal t, Tie Gazette alleges
they 20 pay it, and they 9 DO praT what eeSae ae o
position Of Gov Pollock that its imposition diverts th
markets @ than our own, And whilst the Gazette has 4
hahd ii VIII be good enough to inform evidence
has that in the repealed the local shippe
would not have TO pay the same rates he doesi fh
PesSt 81 y fh the promised reduction
that the eonna an not M nl guaray nave Ne thei
only party benetted By its repeaa T9ae Ge IT,
that the repeal Of the tonnage tax win not simply Be rob
fa Raoad a dompay dai we M
peIns adopt It's view of tue question Until we are So
and @s sa Of & fSsf
Aforesaid any po sb1Tg iTs standSr p : -
We do not think the first part Of the
above article at all important, although it
still appears to us that the Standards first
comments, even with the j, justified an
implication that the local shippers were
content to pay the tax. Nor is it material
what Gov. Pollock's opinions we're.
We come then to the question whether
the local shipper would not have to pay
the same rates he now does," in ease the
tax were repealed? Is not this begging a
question on the part of the Standard? ? If
the principle of taxing trade is wrong, such
a consideration has nothing to do with it,
and ought not to be entertained for mo-
ment. But the likelihood is that on many
articles the freight would be somewhat re-
dueed, or other inducements held out that
would enable the shipper to do business to
better advantage We have no means at
hand to know whether there was reduction
in freight on lumber, but We do know that
since the repeal of the tonnage tax large
quantity of lumber has been sent to this
station from points IN Blair county, which
vas not the case previously.
There could be no robbing the treasury
where the State would be doing a simple
act of Justice We contend that the peo-
pie along the line of the railroad who use
it for the purpose of conveying then pro-
duets TO market, in addition to paying a
State tax equal to that imposed ON other
sections, are now paying about one mill
more on all their assessable property, The
consideration for which this tax was i'm
posed has passed away by the sale of the
public works-has now become wrong,
and contrary to the principles that govern
trade on other roads, whether rail, plank,
or turnpike. If it is right for the State to
tax iron, -four, wheat, &c. shipped from
Hollidaysburg ON the Pennsylvania Rail-
road, why not tax the same articles passing
from one point to another in wagons, sleds,
and other modes of conveyance What
would farmer coming to Hollidaysburg
with wagon load of grain say if, after
paying turnpike or plank road tolls, ton
mage agent came along, got the weight, and
reported that there was 81, 81, or 50 due
the State, for bringing his load over those
roads? Would it not have an extraordina-
ry sound to his ears? Yet this is precisely
what the State does as regards all produce
sent over the Pennsylvania Railroad, and
with all Difference to the opinions of others,
it strikes US that he who can discover a
difference between these two modes of con-
veyance must be an adept at splitting hairs.
Our first duty therefore is to ask the State
to repeal this imposition, because it receives
the money That done, it will be time
enough to shrek out monopoly" and other
corresponding terms calculated to catch the
popular breeze, when the Pennsylvania
Railroad viii refuse to make any alteration
in its charges for freight. IF the company
is making money enough with its present
rates to pay a fair dividend, as well as the
three mill tax, then, in case of repeal
they ought to make reduction correspond
ing with the amount repealed this the
public would demand, and when it does sc
with any degree of unanimity it is not Otter
thwarted in its purpose.
Tie editor of the Standard, like many
other individuals, seems to pride himsel
on his opposition to this repeal, and take
every occasion IL make fling at the road
Now will he for moment lay aside al
other feelings and canllidly examine th'
following propositions:
ls Is domestic trade proper suhect Of taxation
the Stats3
q. The consideration, for which any specihS- tax
levied having passed away is IL rghste continSe sue
taxation in one part OF tue State 0nlyi
81. Is such principle de1nocratc'
These questions are so simple that any
schoolboy could answer yes or no, and W
hope therefore that the Standard will Civ
us sound reasons for a negative, should h
;t,o him we are omen to cor