The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-06-07

may then be brought to perceive the wisdom of
the course o the Government But il the event
proves that we can teach England nothing by
good example, then the next Fenian invas on
will have quite another ending and our neu-
trality Will be OF very different pattern.
Permanent and PrecariOus Incomes
Frtm The Daiig Netos.
There is very Objectionable feature in the
Income Tax, which it would be well for Con
gress, in its reformation of the Internal Revenue
laws, to take into consideration. This is the i'm
position of the same rate OF duty upon such per-
manent incomes as are derived from real estate
and none etary investment in stocks, shares, mort
cages, etcetera, from what may be called capi-
talizcd property, and upon such pIecarious ones
as are derived from labor and the profits of
trades and professions. IL is true that no dis
tlnction is made IN the duties levied upon in.
comes IN Great Britain, yet there has ALWAYS
been, and still continues to be- q large body of
influential men and persistent financial relormers
III that country, who are stoutly opposed to the
present system of taxing all incomes alike; bat
those ale overruled by the aristocrats and land
owners IN Parliament, who naturally desire to
lessen their own burdens as much as possible
even though it should necessitate an unfair
weight beng carried by the industrial popula-
tion OF the kingdom. Now it forclbly strikes us
that the very cause which produces such inius.
lice IN an ar1stocratic country, should have the
enect OF leading 10 more equitable adjustment
by the citizens OF a republican and eminently
Industrial nation.
The profits of all trades and professions NAV
be looked upon as lite annultles, the owners OF
which are, by the present system OF levying the
income tax, charged five times as much as those
more fortunate persons who have investments
in real estate or otherwise, who may be said 10
be the most wealthy persons in the land and
who possess that sarplus fund which is over and
above what is required for the maintenance of
lie productive classes, and live upon 1t without
any labor of their own.
The security OF property more than anyihing
else depends upon the stability of govern
ment; therefore property should contribute its
proper porfortion to the support Of government.
a persons income from such q source depre-
ciates in proportion as his property is less
secure. But If by stable government his pro-
pertY ls rendered perfectly saie he is not only
enabled during his life to support himself with
out labor, but at his death to leave the entire of
his possessions to whomever he chooses to be-
queath them. 1t is different with the man who
gains his livelihood by labor, or lives upon the
profits of trade or Jroiession. good govern
ment certainly guarantees to him security in
ms person, but 1T secures him no income except
that Tor which he tolls; and, when his capital
solely consists in his own brains or in his
brawny arms, ii IS eXtinguished at his DEATH
Ii Is not lair, then that the latter, who does not
receive so large an amount OF protection from
the government as the former, should be re-
quired 10 bear an equal amount of taxation.
But there are other and still more Weehty
reasons why precarlous incomes should be less
heavily taxed than permanent ones, We can
rest explain the matter by an illustration.
Two persons possess incomes Ot five thousand
dollars a year EACH obtains his from the
rental OF real estate, which he inherited; it
satisfies his desires, so he lives an idle life
contributes nothingt to the general welfare of the
country, and when he dies leaves the entire
property to his descendants. B is lawyer or
ply sician, whose professional education has
cost several years OF study, and perhaps an out
lay OF some four or five thousand dollars. After
some years OF weary waiting he manages to earn
the hve thousand year, but he cannot afford to
live up to the extent OF his income, like his more
fortunate neighbOr A, because it is u precarious
one, dependent on his eXeTtions and health; he
must therefore set aside certain sum annually,
so that he may have the means OF support when
oyertaken by sickness or old age, or In the
Tor his widow and probably young family.
And yet BIS precarious income is taxed pre-
clsely the same amount as AS permanent one.
1t is not only manifestly unfair, but highly
inpolitic, that the annual proceeds of property
and industry should be taxed alike. When a
determination is made in iavo' of the latter, the
income tax will escape part of the odum it
has at present. to bear. Every inducement
should be given the possessor OF precarious
income TO set apart pOr1on thereof tor "a
RAINY day" this, in its turn, Would become per-
manent property, the proceeds of which would
be liable to the higher rate of duty that should
be impo. ed upon permanent incomes. Taxation,
at the best, can never be said to meet with
favor in the eyes OF the people, who have to bear
IT; but when taxes are fairly distributed, the
burden becomes far less onerous than when the
reverse is the rnle.