Gallipolis journal. [volume] (Gallipolis, Ohio) 1837-1919, 1864-02-04
MisfflIanfoms.


augural address.
1t relates particularly to the t
for relief of Soldiers families, and
therefore interesting to the tax-pa
ers and friends of the soldiers. II
Governor argues the question in
spirit of liberality and PATRIOTS,
worthy of the highest commendi
ton:
In one particular only, do / desire
upon this occasion, to add to the ret
ommendation of my predecessor
and that's in regard to the act c
March 21st. 1868, imposing tax 70
the aid of the families of soldier
and marines In the service. I hav
carefully watched the operations O
this law. 1t is not sufficient for it.
purposes I cordially approve th,
recommendation Of Gov. Tod for th,
increase of the tax; but in my judg
ment that increase should be ever
greater than heproposes, in order to
do justice alike to our soldiers and
our people. The advance in the
cost of living has reached the neces-
saries of life as heavily as the luxu-
ries. The increase of wages does not
reach the labor of dependent women,
with children to clothe, feed, and edu-
cate. The amount saved from their
scanty pay, and sent home by our
soldiers; though large in the aggre-
gate, is very small in its distribution
amoug those for who it is designed.
When the revenue, and the proceeds
of the tax, are added together, there
is still large amount dependent
upon private bounty, to meet the ac-
tual wants of this class of people,
and ward off positive suffering. 1
have not been able to collect the
statistics as extensively as desired
but in many counties of the State,
the private collections for soldiers
families have considerably exceeded,
and in some cases doubled the
amount of the tax. Even in these
cases the object has not been fully
accomplished. 1t is argued that it
is better to continue thus to divide,
between State and people, this con-
tribution; so that in what the one
fails, the other makes good. The
true and just response is:
1st. That if the State acknowl-
edge this obligation to the family of
the absent soldier, she should meet it
as compensation for his services,
and in a manner fully equal to the
necessities of the case.
I'd. Private contribution is not
equitable i'll its character, and cannot
be adjusted to the property and in
terests that are protected by our
armies. The generous will give be-
yond their actual abilities, while
the parusimonious, or the opponent of
the war, will withhold from pecunia-
ry or unpatriotic considerations
Taxation alone will equalize this bur-
then, and impose it, where it should
rest upon the property protected by
the services that the revenue is in
tended to compensate. If the ad-
ditional levy increase the taxation of
generous contributors, it relieves
them from a larger amount of pri-
vate bounty, imposes 1t upon the
non contributors, where it should
fall. Even when the State assumes
the entire support of soldiers fami-
lies, there will be scope enough for
private contributions to alleviate the
pr1vations and sufferings of sick, dis
abled and wounded men in hospitals
and at home.
Sd. The form of private charity
is not always acceptable to its
recipients, and especially the class
to whom this is applicable. Much
suffering and privation will be endur-
ed before pride will suffer applica-
ton to private charity, where there
is consciousness that meritorious
services of the absent providel
should promptly call the State to the
protection and support of his depen.
| dent family. We should divest this
| fund ofthe apelation of charity. i
is not such in any application of the
term. 1t is an honest debt. and al
imperative duty, that we owe the
men who are serving us in position:
of labor and danger. They saw,
us from invasion-from the destruc
! tive ravages of war within our Dor
ders. While they press the con
quests of our arms for the restora
f ton of our government, they pro
tect our property and our lives; the.
are the conservators of all the pros
perity that surrounds us. They d.
s not perform this service for tn
small compensation allowed ther
for the Government They are &C
1t tuated by higher and a nobler me
tive; and while they incur privs
tons, danger aud death for the com
mon cause, the State should not onl
9 protect their families from want, bu
make the act one of right and justfr
compensation, instead of burthenin
q it with the offensive appellation {
charity. Neither should it be go,
erned by the rigid economy of mel
Ia subsistence. 1t should be at leai
such plenty and comfort as the sta
r wart arm Of the natural provide
W would furnish them if he were ,
home to1flor II instead or lahoTinp