Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1860-05-22

The Gazette and the Per Capita.
The Gazette, in unison with all the other
English dailies in the city-the PRESS alone
excepted--takes considerable interest in OPP
posing the remission of the per capita tax
upon railway travellers. This is natural
enough. 1t does not belong to the code of
ethics by which our cotemporaries are gov
erned to advocate the reduction of burdens OF
any kind. A tax, once established, becomes
sacred, becomes an institution, which to
abolish is to overthrow one of the muni-
ments of our social system. Conservatism of
the burden becomes conservatism of society,
which to war against is immoral and dan
gerous.
The Gazette is of the opinion that the tax
does not fall upon passengers, but upon the
companies. Yet it will not deny that il
there were no passengers there would be no
per capita; nor can it otherwise than admit
that, until the tax is taken off, any reduction
of fares is out of the question. This makes
the tax obviously oppressive; not only upon
the companies, but upon the people-cutting
off the profits Of the one, and keeping up the
tariff on the other. Whether, therefore, the
people pay the tax or not, there is no getting
aside the fact that they are sufferers under IT,
The companies cannot hope to increase their
business until they have the ability to offer
additional inducements by way of a re-
duction in price, and the people will either
pay Che high fares or refrain from using the
roads in consequence of their exorbitancy
they who refrain, being burdened through
the deprivation of that which would other.
wise be within their reach, and for theil
advantage.
The Gazette finds that the sought-for re-
mission viii enure to the benefit Of the com
panies and not to that of the people, and thai
therefore it ought not to take place. If the
tax is illegal-a question which our cotempo-
rary avoids-the argument goes for nothing
The tax should be RENTED if nobody but the
companies can, by any possibility, receive
any good from the act. But if it is legal ant
yet is oppressive--if such thing as an op
pressive legal tax is possible--it should still
be taken off. The doctrine of the Gazette il
that Of Shylock:" to have the pound o
flesh, no matter what its effect may be upol
the other party; but this is not the principl,
by which wise men and able legislators per
init themselves to be governed.
Our contemporary is unable to see through
the companies to anything that lies beyond
He is unwilling to give them chance to i'm
prove their policy, for fear they viii not do i
when the opportunity arises and, therefore
advocates course which puts improvement
2 beyond their power. The companies hay
| invested their money; they are compelled t.
! run their cars to save their property fror
ruinous depreciation. If now the city cal
continue to pocket all the profits, the eco
I nomical notions of our contemporaries ar
satisfied and, in their view, justice is done I
all parties. gag. L
n Now, we suppose it would not be easy 70
o the Gazette to show why there should be
!. special tax laid upon railways, in considers
tion of their passengers, any more than upo
any other business establishment, in cor
sideration of its customers. We certainl
: know no reason in principle for such di
n elimination, nor have we observed any 81
n rious attempts on the part of the advocates
# the tax to show any. 1t is true that IL
n Gdzstte-probably looking in that direction.
II called the railway monopoly of the street
re but this was simply misnomer. Neith
n tracks nor cars are monopolists of the street
If they were they should not and would N
X be tolerated; and to receive the tax in Co
h. sideration of, would be as wrong as to d
We mand it, under pretense, of a monopoly.