The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1860-05-08
REVENUE AND LABOR.

ers, and that such limited powers are delegated
aud not inherent. Among the powers delegated
are those of imposing taxes for the purpose of rails
ing revenue for the support of the Government,
and for the carrying out for which 1t
was intended and not otherwise 1t is further
contended that the grant of power never cOntem-
plated .sprotecon as it is called, that is discrmi
in favor of the interests OF one State or sec
ton at the expense of the rest.
In practice. the revenue standard can be best
arrived at and maintained by levying duties upon
the al yaIor,n system, at least 1T is generally
thought, and therefore that system has been advo-
Gated by the body Of the Democratic party, as a
means to the end in view.
Let us look at this phrase, nd rolorcm, as so
used and contended for by democrats: 1t was con-
tended for in opposition to specifics and minimums
advocated by the protectionist party in the United
States, as best tending to promote their views.
The Tariff act of 1916 divided imports into nine
schedules, enacting that there should be levied,
collected, and paid on goods, wares and merchan-
disc imnorted from foreign countries the following
rates of duty-that is to say:
On goods, wares and merchandise mentioned in
schedule A duty of one hundred per centum ad
valorem.
On goods etc , in schedule duty of forty per
cent ad valUrem-in schedule G duty of thirty
per cent. d t,ccnty,fre per cent? face"ty per
CCUl.-T U|'cfH pei FH pei CVhU- IL
fire per cent. ad vaIorem. Schedule | consisted
of articles admitted free of duty.
This tariff taxed spirituous liquors one hundred
per cent, Wines etc, forty per cent, and so down.
commencing with luxures until it came to tea
and coffee, wholly free.
Let us look at the operation of the different sys-
tens: Say manufactures wholly of cotton, not
otherwise provided for, are, according to the tariff
of 46, taxed % per cent. ad vaorem, that is, cot
81 = >
duty per yard-goods worth 10 cents per yard
would pay 22-and those worth cents would
pay }, and so on. That would be ad valorem
According to the system of specific duties, it would
be certain stated, specific per yard, say
cents, which would, perhaps, be 80 per cent upon
common goods, and not II per cent upon fine
goods. The system of nitHiDtHDaS is like to that
of specifies in its tendency to tax unequally and
discriminate against coarse common goods: Say,
for instance, cotton goods, upon which, according
to this system, certain per centage is levied, not
upon its actual value but upon assumed value;
now let cents per yard be the assumed mini
mum valuation for purposes of taxation, % per
cent upon that would be only 20 Per cent upon
goods worth 10 cents per yard. while it would be
333 per cent. upon goods worth q cents per yard.
We have occupied this much space in referring
to al valorem as urged by Democrats in national
politics, first. because the subject is but little
derstood, and second because out of this little
understanding arises the tendency to confound the
Democratic doctrine of ad valorem, with the hobby
which has recently been started in this State, and
which has pretty generally received the title of
sad rniorcm." Men say, "why, you democrats
pledged to ad valorem in NATIONAL atfairs--how
you oppose it in State mattcrs:' We have
that the tariff of 1916, democratic adj valo-
rem tariff, instead OF imposing uniform rates upon
every descril ton Of goods divided the subjects Of
taxation into nine schedules, ranging from
hundred per cent. liquors to per cent. on
grindstones, and finally nothing upon tea, coffee
guano, etc. This is very different thing from
the proposition abroad in North Carolina to
tax equally "evcrv species of property" The
Democratic tariff Of 1916 did not pretend to i'm
pose the rate of per centage upon every
species Of property; neither in State nor Federal
Government is the Democratic party pledged to
any such thing, nor has any such thing been done
by any government in the world
The taxes levied by the United States are al
together of one character, being in the nature Of
duties upon imports. The taxes levied by State
certainly by this Stae-are direct-in the nature
of an inland eXciSe-in the nature of specific taxes
upon callings, of poll tax, etc, some of them
admitting of the application Of the ad valorem
principle and some not. The fact is that the talk
about ad vaOrem was found untenable. AID valo-
rem, as advocated by the Democrats basis for
levying duties upon imported merchadise was
found to mean nothing like the uniform unbendihg
rule that would tax necessaries high luxuries
act without sense, reason, or reference to public
policy, or the different ability of different things to
bear taxation The dodge, first started, won't
dO with intelligent men, for all can that it is
wholly unjust, not to say certainly i'm
possible At Io}orcm is dropped. 1t is Equal
Taxation" now, which the central organ-the Raj
eigh Register-says, following the language Of the
Opposition platform, means equal taxation upon
every species of propertv-taxng man in exact
proportion to what he is worth little or much, or
however invested, while the Albemarle Southron,
published at Murfreesboro says, "the only change
proposed III the Constitution is, to put negroes on
an exact equality with other property" We have
no doubt the Register represents pretty accurately
the hobby Of the central clique, while the South
ron follows the Fayetteville Observer, which is
shrewd enough to see that the obvious meaning of
the resolutions of the Opposition platform is an abb
surdity, if, indeed, absurdity can be said to be
or have meaning of any kind.
But big parade is made of negro property, and
also over what is said to be undue discrimination
in its favor
The leading ease" upon this point-that copied
by the followers of the Opposition press and enun-
ciated by all Of its orators who do more than rant
is the article of the Fayetteville Observer, in
which the slaves of the State, stated at 300 900,
are estimated purely as property, as capital at the
average valuation of 5000 each, thus making their
aggregate valuation come to $3.50, 900, 900.
Now, in the first place this valuation is unfair.
We say distinctly, that, valued in the same man.
ner that lands are-in the proportion to their
I,-.,l,, Al, 4. L