Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1859-05-21
n the Standard
y - For the St8noaru.
AID VALOREN TAXATION.

AID VALOREA TAXATION.
NEssRs. ED1roRs send you the following, with |
reouest that YOU give it place in the columns |
Of your useful paper and would be glad to see it cop
led in all the papers of the State not for the literary
merit it possesses for pretends none, but because
Il treats of subject in which all tax payers are in
terested A subject the aim and purpose Of which
is FUNDAMENTAL change in the revenue laws of the
State: introduced in both houses Of the last Gener
Il Assembly and voted down; scotched, but not
killed; mean system of ad ratoren taxation.
It is one of the evils inseparable from representa-
tive governments that they are periodically subject
ed BY aspiring politicians to new propositions for
change and reform. Ad caloren is but another of
series which has preceded it Of this character that
have from time to time, disturbed the quiet of the
people of North Carolina, pregnant with evil, with
out any redeeming quality for the public benefit
It is always desirable when things are working
WELL and no complaint by the people, that politicians
should let them alone, especially when the change
proposed is SO radical, such palpable innovation
upon all former usages IS is the proposed I'D raloren
system of taxation.
The simple abstract proposition that N should
be taxed in exact proportion to what each indivdu
al is worth, strikes the mind at first view as the
most equal and just mode Of raising revenue for
support of government. But the fallacy of such q
conclusion is manifest, when we consider the great
variety there is in the character and quality of prop
erty, and in the pursuits ard occupations of the
people, together with the peculiar institutions of the
State and the utter impracticability of such sys
ten of taxation.
The basis upon which the advocates of ad ralorem
found their arguments to prove its justice and pro-
priety, so far as have been able to understand
them may be fairly stated in the form of syllogsm
thus
All men are equally protected in their persons
and property by the government Government
can't afford that protection without revenue. There
fore all men should contribute revenue to the gov
srnulcnt in proportion to the protection received
Corollary-it is right just and equal that all men
shall contribute revenue in proportion to the net
value of their respective estates.
Now this argument is right in the premises but
the conclusion and inference evidently wrong if
not absurd There is no proportion in the premises.
By what rule in logic is proportion gotten in the
conclusionY The legitimate conclusion from the
premises is that every man should pay an equal
amount of revenue for support Of government For
they say, and say truly, that all men are equally
protected in their persons and property. Then
there is no proportion between the rich and poor.
The man with his 100 acres of land and one negro
receives Just as much protection from the govern
ment as the man with his thousand acres and hun
dred negroes. The rich man has more property
protected than the poor man. but the protection af
forded by the State is exactly the same in extent
and potency to the one as to the other and the ma
to protect the man with his thousand acres and
hundred negroes are also necessary to the same ex
tent to protect the man with his hundred acres and
one negro. Consequently the expense of the State
for the protection afforded is no more for the one
than the other. Hence the obligation to support
government for the protection and benefit re-
ceived, is equal Again, the man owning hundred
acres land in the sandhs worth 30 cents per acre.
enjoys as much protection from the State in person
and property, as the man who owns hundred
acres in the rich valley of the Roanoke worth $50
per acre. The same is true of every other species
Of property, showing conclusively that while the
premises are true the conclusion is wrong and that
the inference is neither reasonable or Just; nor the
T. legitimate offspring Of the argument
Its plain therefore, that it is impractcable to fix
asystem Of taxation, the justice of which is based
alone on the amount Of benefits and protection re-
ceived from the government And although such
q system of taxation would be the result of the
premises laid down in the argument; yet they saw
no system Of taxation is just that is not based On
the value of property. Well, that would not be
just and equal becaust some property is profitable
and some expensive to the owner; some imperisha-
bic, and some subject to destruction and loss
Hence it would seem that no general system Of
taxation can be devised under our government that
Will be just and equal on all of her citizens. All
the people enjoy equal rights and equal privileges.
and are equally protected in their interest persons
and property, and for these benefits all are equally
indebted to the government Then upon strict
principles Of equity and justice, based upon obliga
ton and debt to the State, all who own propert,
Of the same species without regard to quantity O,
value, should pay for support of the government
the same amount Of taxes and all, bota rich anG
poor, pay alike on their heads
But It is evident that revenue law based on thes,
principles would ruin the poor. Then it is of ne
cessity ana pohcy IN conTadstinction to obligation
ana oeot, IN order to protect and favor the poorer
class, ana TO raise revenue sufficient to meet tn,
wants Of the State, that taxes must be imposed nc
cofdmg 70 the apparent ability to pay, having du
regard to the peculiar nature of the propertv To
taxed that is, whether it is profitable and of certai,
and permanent value to the owner, or extensive
and Of doubtful Duration
{ And this is the principle on which the State h.
passed her revenue system from the organization !
the government, as is evident upon the examinatio
OF ner early revenue laws, when no other propert
was required to be listed for TAXATION out real estat
saves ana stud horses. Lands were taxed then b
81 tne hundred acres, and slaves male and fsmal,
tfom II years old to sixty each poll paying as muc
nx IS soo acres Of iand, most evidently discrimin,
ting in favor Of slave property. And M do,,ht e
the reason that young and old negroes are srn.n.,
to their owners, and all subject to casualties m
death, while land is profitable and permanent in 4
duration. And it is worthy Of note, thai VII;
negro property has always been taxed sinplv .
NE pcn, and such only Is are capable being proti
aple 70 the owner, There having been no chan,
except reducing the age from sixty to fifty YEA
oao wnen tney shall be free from taxation-that re
the 1O0 acTer to tax on valuation. :. nj, seer
NOT tonaSe been understood by the champions Of I
caloTe'n, or it would not have been seid NTH en-
emPhasissy Que, that the amended constitnt;on
amring captation tax to be equal on ali subject
y, 49, :sA Tss allssL spoa The principles Of den