Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1860-04-25


practicable polite and just; and "still the wonder
grows" that this symmetrical plan for adjusting the
revenue of every State has not heretofore been adopt
cd, and the great problem of equalizing taxation
the most complex which agitstes the brain OF the
statesman, solved forever. Now the Democratic
principle has ever bcen anil is now, to ADJUST taxa
ton so as to bear equally as prac,caote upon inc
rarious interests and cfxses Of property IN all sec
tons of the State. 1t takes into consideration not
the ra1e of the property 0lone, but its actual or
potential productveness; the cost of its protection
whether it be great or little; the ability of the owner
to pay contribution to the government; whether
the tax will be voluntary an extorted one; ana
also, whether the general interest of the State and
of the whole people demands that the ownership OF
that species of property shall be fostered or
aged So far from the concluding clause in the elev-
enth resolution of the platform of the Democratic
party recognizing the justice and fairness OF at Ca
loren taxation and so far from that partys beng
willing to apply it to every subject of taxation save
and except slave property by advocating an equail-
cation of the burdens of taxation, it expressly re-
pudiates any such doctrine, contending that no
system of taxation can be just and fair which looks
solely and only to the monied value of the property
to be taxed without any regard to the other ee-
ments indicated which are to he regarded in liking
the amount of any excise; and the only reason Why
taxing property of different species at palorefH Is
not always ruinous is not because the principle is
correct one but because many different species OF
property of the value chance to have the same
productivcness the cost OF their protection IS &C.
cidentally the same; the owners chance to be
equally able to pay taxes out of their profits; ana
the State and whole people are casually equally IN
terested in fostering or dscouragins the ownership
of each. In such cases, and under such circum-
stances, the all ralorem system may be resorted to
with justice and propricty The Democratic dc
trine of an ad ralorem tariff upon imported goods,
is not only entirely different in its character from
this proposed system of taxation, but in its principle
it clearly opposes it. The Democratic partyis not
to be deceived and mislcd, nor will yoa be- fellow
citizens by words. The tariff bill Of 1916 classified
all articles likely to be imported under nine sche-
dulles, discriminating in favor of articles of prime
necessity and against luXuries-thc tax upon which
last is eventually paid by the wealthy consumer
and ended with free list Schedule LIST, containing
brandics, &c, was subjected to duty of one hun
dred per cent on the value of the goods: while
schedule sth, containing raw hides, dyestus feril-
zcrs and other useful articles in trade manufactures
and agriculture only paid duty of five per cent on
the value; and schedule 9th, containing tea, coffee
and other articles of prime necessity, makes out the
free list subjected to no duty at all. But the plan
of the Opposition party, if there is meaning in
language, is one uniform unbcnding rule Of the
same per centagc all species of property and IA"
free list Carrying out their principle to its natural
and logical results the Opposition party does not
recognize the glaring fact that taxes are much more
onerous to the poor man than to the rich; that the
small farmer or day laborer, who has managed to
collect around him his small. but to him incxpres
sibly DEAR stock of household furniture and agrcul
tural implements; his COW and pigs and little COM
forts can less afford to pay per cent on his few
hundreds than the owner of thousands can to pay
per centage upon his wealth, is fact totally ignor
ed every article that is capable of being owned Is to
be subjected to an equal per centagc of taxation;
and while the Opposition party strive to avoid this
legitimate result of their principle, system and pro-
mulgated platform, the published proceedings Of
their convention make them consistent in spite of
themselves; for "Mr Turner, of Orange" says the
Raleigh Register in the official report of their pro-
ceedngs
"Movcd to take the vote on al ralorem, offering
an amendment against taxing such small matters
tin cups, plates, &c. Mr.. Badger proposed change
in his amendment, which was accepted The amend
ment of Mr.. Turner was then adopted.
Mr.. Henry, of BERTHE, then moved reconsidera-
ton the amendment entering his protest against it.
Mr.. Barringer, of Cabarrus, seconded sir. Henry.
Mr.. Rayner hoped Mr. Turner would withdraw it.
The motion to reconsider prevailed; not being
withdrawn, the amendment was REJECTED. The
question then recurring upon the passage Of the ad
ral0rem resolution, it passed almost unanimously"
Thus have they not accidently but advisedly
agreed to advocate the taxation OF the mnutcst article
contrary even to the teachings of Holy Writ; for,
when the Man of sorrows saw in Jerusalem the rich
men casting their gifts into Gods treasury, and a
certain poor widow cast in thither her two mites,
he turned unto his disciples and said to them, of
truth say unto you, this poor widow hath cast
in more than they all, for all these have o: their
| abundance, cast in unto the offerings Of God but
she Of her perjury hath cast in all the living which
she had" Gods treasury may receive such gifts,
for verify they have their reward; but woe! woe
unto that earthly government which fills its Golfers
with the pence wrung from the hard hands of honest
poverty, which enriches its treasury with the scanty
! pttance of the widow and the orphan.
| cllow-ctiZens, we have asked over and over
again OF the advocates of an all ralorem system Of
taxation why all property ought to be taxed in pro-
portion to its value? and up to this moment no rea
is given for it. but the reitcration of the propo
son itself and the few efforts that have been made to
give some satisfactory andlogca reasons for change
in our whole system of taxation when carefully ex
amned show clearly that the conclusion to which
the Opposition party has arrived is based upon
| false assumption.
Government, say the advocates Of ad raloren tax
ation is instituted for the protection of persons and
property, and therefore persons and property ought
to pay the expenses of Government; and properta
ought to pay those expenses in proportion to its
value, because the cost of it's protection is measured
by the value of the property This is the course
argument that must be pursued when the matter is
fully stated.
Now, merely pausing to point out that this mode
of argument cannot have eren an appearance O
truth, when the revenues raised are not to be ap
piled to the ordinary expenses of the government
but to the extraordinary purposes of constructing
railroads, digging canals and paying debts already
contracted by the State for internal improvements
and that same regard ought to he had in laying ex
cses, to the objects upon which the revenues Of tn
State are to be expended, we venture the asserto,
that neither one of the propositions upon which tn
Opposition party rely to establish their conclusion
is sound one in political science.
1t is not true that Government is instituted for tn
protection of persons and property; nor is it fac
that the cost Of the protection of each species @
property is regulated by the monied value of tn
property itself 1t is sometimes loosely said tina
government is instituted for the protection of pei
sons and property, but when fully stated accordin
to all authority, the true proposition is, and tn
meaning attached fo tho 1ooco cfo