Dayton daily empire. [volume] (Dayton [Ohio]) 1850-1865, 1865-08-04

iuat Oh tno Aoth uag VI DWgs III thO
year Of our Lord 1865, the Dayton Jour
nal, the organ of the Union party in this
county, came out firmly and squarely
against imposing any tax whatever upon
the bonds OF the United States, to aid in
defraying the enormous expenses of the
Government incurred by the late war.
We are very glad, indeed, that the or
gan Of this sell-constituted Union party
has had the manliness for once to speak
out its true sentiments upon this, to the
people, all-important question. Unless
the Journal takes the backward move-
ment on this, as it did on the negro suf-
frage question. we will know hereafter
where to find it upon this great question
of public policy and public justice.
We suppose it in no way unfair to in
fer, as the journal is the acknowledged
organ of the Union party in this county,
that it speaks the sentiments of the aiore-
said "loyap" institution. 1t is fact,
which cannot be successfully denied, that
these bonds, which the Journal is opposed
to taxing, are principally in bepossession
of rich men and spectators, "loyal" gen
tlemen who remained at home for the
purpose Of prosecuting those who did not
agree with them in political sentiment,
and amassing immense fortunes out of the
calamities Of their country all Of which
plumber they could well afford to be '1oy
al" enough to invest in non-taX paying
Government bonds, which remunerates
them with seven or eight per cent. On the
Investment.
We take, therefore, as a demonstrated
fact, that this immaculate Union party, in
this county at least, oppose any tax being
imposed upon the investments of "loyal"
rich men and spectators, for it amounts
to this, and nothing less, because no man
with an idea in the neighborhood where
brains ought to be, will for one moment
deny, but that a vast majority OF these
bonds are in the possession OF tins class
The organ of the Union party in this
county, says these non-paying Govern
ment bonds are in the hands of the peo-
pie We deny it. What people? How
many of the people? They are in the
hands of rich people, who constitute but a
small minority of the whole people
How many of the people of the city OF
Dayton, or of this vicinity, hold these
bonds? We venture to say not more
than one-fifth, and large majority ol
them, the "loyal" rich men of the oity and
county. SO it is in every other city,
town and county in the country.
But, says the organ Of the Union party
in this county, to tax these bonds now,
would be to violate the promise of the
Government. Does the Journal mean to
be understood as saying, that these "loy-
al, patriotic, non-tax-paying bond-hold'
holders, took advantage Of the necessities
of the Government that had not this
promise been given they would have re,
fused to assist the Government in its tint
of need? But if it does not mean this
why object now to assist in defraying the
expenses of the country? What mor'
right have you to be relieved from you
Just proportion of taxation upon this, thar
anv other remunerative investments
But we cannot understand what partic.
ular objection these men, who have fol
lowe the bloody precedents of Stafford
Loud, and Jeffries, can have to thei
own. To violate the promise of the Gov
ernment noaO, would not be the first tim
since the accession to power of the UnioI
party. But if the Union party, which, 10
the time being has been tbr Government
did make such promise, we say it wa
made in fragrant disregard of the interest
and welfare of the laboring and agrlcultu
raj classes of the country, and is in direc
opposition to public policy. public right
and public justice. aud therefore IS voi'
and of no binding effect, If the Unior
party make promises in such total disre
gard of the interest and welfare of thu
Union of these States, it is no reason why
Democrats should not endeAvor to righ
a 49,. ,bo,, bouo tbus committaa