The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1865-07-29

State twenty-five per cent. The State
of Connecticut has an net before it for
n tax offifteen per cent. This action on
the part of these two States has called
out pretty stringent letter from Hon.
Freeman Clarke, Comptroller of the
Currency, in the course of which he
says: -
The law exempting from
taxation government securities Is so
specific and clear that it cannot be qtes-
toned. The bonds were disposed of,
and purchased with the provision of
law, as part of the contract, that they
were to be exempt from taxation, and
the country has received an equivalent
for such exemption in the additional
price received for the bonds.
Can any one believe that the obliga-
tions of the government would have
sold for anything like the price re-
allied, or Mt any price ut all common
surate with their value, if it had been
supposed possible that they could be
taxed by state laws, directly or indi-
rectly? IfyOur legislature can impose
"A tax of fifteen per centum on the in
come derived from government securi-
ties, it is just us competent for it to i'm
pose a tax of fifty or one hundred per
cent. '-,.'
It's a source of regret that any North
ern State should for single moment
countenance an attempt to repudiate or
nulify constitutional act of Congress-,
and one, too, that was deemed neces-
sary to preserve the integrity of the ma
ton. In one aspect of the case, howev-
er, it may be regarded rs most for
tunate occurrence, as it will serve to
show the people TINT it will not be safe
for the government to allow the South
ern States to be so reconstructed as to
permit their being represented in Con-
gress as unit, as they would be, by
men who would be but too willing to
unite with Northern men of the char
acter of those favOring the measure un-
der consideration, to repudiate the ma
tiOnal debt, if not by direct action, by
an equally destructive want of action
FIJI providing the means of payment. 1
am glad to hear, and the whole coun-
try have reason to rejoice, that the FL
nance Committee of your State Senate
stands opposed to the inSidious mea-|
sure. The effect of the proposed tax
would be to reduce the value of govern
ment securities in hands of the people
of your State fifteen per cent, provided
there was an assurance that no further
eXactiOn would be imposed, but with
out such assurance would reduce the
market value much more, as the next
or any subsequent Legislature could
increase the tax to the extent of de-
stroying their productive value entirely.
q -
If this action was confined to the two
States the result would simply be to
deprive the people of New Hampshire
and Connecticut Ofthe privilege of hold
ing or owning government securities.
1t is very clear that the States would
not get the tax, as the owners would sell
their securities to parties out of the
States, or go out themselves with the
securities.
If, however, other Northern States
should follow their example, and it
should be conceded that they had the
right to do SO, the credit of the govern
ment and of, the national currency
would be practically destroyed.
Phis, perhaps, is the object of the con-
tederacy in this suicidal scheme. I
think am justified in saying that there
is not the least danger of the proposed
act, If it should become n law, being
sustained by the Supreme Court of the
United States.
1t is perhaps proper that should say
that the Secretary of the Treasury con-
ours in my views as to the right of the
States to tax United States Securities.
but is not otherwise ignorant of the
contents of this letter.
referring to the proposed net to tax
the stock owned by individuals in ma
tlOnal banks, L am clearly of opinion
that such stock represented by capital
invested i'll whole or in part in United
States securities, is liRblelto State taxa
lon only onthenmount not so invested.
.