Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1862-03-15
The Tax Brll-some Unjust Particu.

The New York Erening Post. though at times
very ultra on the negro question. has always
maintained one principle of Democratic faith, IN
der all circumstances. That principle Is the old
Democratic doctrine of taxation Upon ali CUES
tons relating to the tariff or finances the Post is
as soundly Democratic as it ever was; and the
ability with which it discusses such topics render.
it a most valuable public journal. That paper
calls attention to some features of the tax bill
which discriminate very unjustly.
LIST. Slaves are property, and yet slaves are not
taxed. Loyal men are taxed upon every imagi-
nable object of domestic use; horses, Carriages
pianos, silver spoons, and also every branch Of
productive industry. They are taxed upon their
beet and pork. their -four and upon ali articles of
manufactured food They are taxed upon every
grain of medicine used for their sick, and
for every beverage used by the well. Why
should not the slaves be taxei? Why should not
the millions of property invested in slaves be
taxedl The Post estimates that tax OF five
dollars per head upon slaves would yield twenty
millions of dollars. The only objection that can
be urged TO such tax is, that it recognizes slaves
property And 10 do that, some thin skinned
politicians thi:lk is Objectionable than to let
slave owners 90 exempted from taxation, and to
collect from the loyal industry of the North that
additional sum. We know that the people of this
State, with very few exceptions, no matter what
their politics. would pay their taxes with far
greater satisfaction, If they knew that a. the
same time the tax gItherer taking their hard
earnings, like officers were collecting twenty mil
lions from the slave owners But alasi party
platforms must let the slave owners pass free and
extOrt their share of national burdens from the
free white labor of the North
Cotton is another article not taxed. Why not?
When the army takes possession of cotton dis
trict why not have the tax eatherer visit each
planter, and require him to give, under oath, a
statement of the bales of cotton raised since the
rebellion upon his plantationl and why not col
lect of him tax of one, two or three cents a
pound upon that cottong The farmers of Ii-
nOs have to pay tax upon each hog, and each
barrel of flour, and why not tax cottong In 1860
the exports of cotton were III Also 1873 pounds
A tax OF two cents per pound on the crop of 1861
suppOsing it TO be the same, would Yield over
$50 700 900. Why should this source of revenue
be untouched. when the bill enters every domicile
mt the \ Orth and demands a stipend for the war
upon every article of food and of domestic usel
Cotton manufacturers are not taxed sufficiently.
Why not send the tax gatherer to every cotton
mill in New England? Why not require of these
men, whose treasures have grown plethoric un
der the abomnable protection of the Morrill,
tariff, and make them give list of the number
of yards OF domestic goods, cotton and wooden,
manufactured by them? Why not require of
them a tax of one or two cents per yard upon
their manufactured Why not have the millions
from these men, who, ever since the war have
enjoyed such a harvest of prohtsg Ii twenty
millions can be collected from that source why
not collect il. as well as to send round the tax
gatherer to weigh the silver spoons and little
cups OF every family in the West, in order ex-
tort the last possible dollar for the support OF the
war.
Another inequality in the operation of the law
strikes US iorcibly. Spirituous liquors are taxed
sixteen cents gallon. all alike. The whisky
which Is worth only fifty cents gallon is taxed
sixteen cents; and the brandy which is worth
eight dollars gallon is taxed only sixteen cents.
The men who cln afford to buy such expensive
liquors far more able to pay proportonate
tax. than are they who consume the fifty cent
whisky. Let the old notion OF specific duty be
abandoned, ami let the Gd UatOrem principle be
followed Let the consumers of spirltu0us IL
Quors be taxed according to the value of the ar
ticle they consume. Let the fiftv cent whisky be
taxed ut the rate provided in the bill according to
the proof, but let the consumers who enjoy the
luxury of costly wines and liquors pay proper
tonate tax. II a man have the means to EN- IDLE
hum to buy liquors worth eight dollars per gallon
and therefore sixteen times above the use of the
fifty cent whisky let him pay tax sixteen times
above that paid by his poorer neighbor.
Again. gallon of brandy OF fourth proof, is
worth eight dollars; upon that article there is a
tax of just sixty four cents, while upon the com
mon beverage of the poor, ale and beer, tax OF
one dollar per barrel is imposed. and also heavy
license fee for its sale Is extorted. Here is
another evidence of the injustice of specific du.
ties. Why tax the barrel of ale, worth six dol
lars, ore dollar, and only tax the eight dollars
worth of brandy to the extent Of sixty four cents
The taxes are in principle, unjustly discrmna
ting against the poor and humble consumer in
favor of those who have the means to purchase
the more costly luxuries-C Chicago Post.