The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1867-10-05
III 4 Prom Courier of yesterday
democratic and .Repuhlican Taxation

Il ~ q Itr0m courier OF yeSt0Fudy.l
democratic and RepnhliGan Taxation,
4 The JOURNAL of yesteday had a long ar
ticle contrasting Dem ecratic and Republic
can taxation in a few counties in this
State. They have singled out the most
heavily taxed Democratic mites audthe
least taxed Republican counties. The
whole thing is a farce. 1t needs but a few
words to answer and explode the silly stuff
Men of sense know that there are seve-
raj local matters that enter into the taxa
BILE rates of one County that do not in
another. For instance, the building of a
new Court House In a County viii increase
its taxable rates, so also improvement in
the way ofsCounty subscriptions to turn
pixies, railroads, the payment of bonds TO
volunteers, &C., &c. 1t will be thus seen
at, once that to- single and contrast few
counties, without regard to Improvements
going on in stthem, as the oJoUREAL has
donev is most Unfair The trick. is too
transparent to deceive even q fool. and we
won't waste further words about it. = tssei
The Courier says We singled out
the most heavily taxed Democratic
counties and the least taxed sRepubli7s
can counties" Every one who read
our article knows ye did no such thing.
We selected Thirteen of the most
populous Democratic counties and
twenty of the most popuious ,Repub-
lican counties, with the following re-
suit .sl,..-..,. {,,.ssss.s..s "a ssaa ss...
40 5aesses3s.sas $. No. { Local ~ Per r
Is DEM counties 5 Ke5ss asss 81 s
% Rep counties, lo6, $50 15es,es3 IA so
Hereiare twenty Republican ccunse
ties, with twice the population of
thirteen Democratic counties with ar
less aggregate amount Of taxation.
In the ninety-two counties of the
State Of Indiana, We. defy the Courier
to find thirteen Republican counties
which are as heavily taxed. Let us
have the figures. =
Bat we did RET I single cut" copn-s
ties in our estimate for the First Dis
trict. We eontrasted Vanaerburgh
with the counties in, this District
which gave Democratic majorities at
the last election. with the following
result: = 7a.f fssEs5 lI14st 70 isesssf..s -
~ ,dSas sginhiae sata-a1 s = a. ssfs,.
Dubois. for county expenses - $40 IS
K Ma5rlck'Hosq a. bsore...-,:s.... g r
Vanderbursh, do. a,s.-...-.-.-....I0 81
| Will the Courier designate which
one Of these counties. expended mon
ey last year, for bun ding q new
Court House?p Not one of them. |
Which one, made subscriptions to
turnpikes and railroads. /" last year.
upon which money was expended by |
the countya Neteae-of them. Which
one levied a. tax for thesH payment of |
bonds Cor bounties) to volunteers
lastyear? BY. reference to the official
report ofthe State Auditor, we find that |
Dubois did which is out of the District,
butnot one of the Democratic counties
Of. the District as now constituted, rel
ported any levy for bounty tax. The
items of expense were the same in
each of the counties compared, and
our readers have seen the re-
suit. We lave shown by the
oficial report that there is not a sim
gle Democratic county in this, Dis
trict. where the taxes are as light as
in Vanderburgh. The Courier does
not dispute the correctness of our
figures. If they are correct. the con-
clusion is inevitable. twill not do
to treat this matter with the indifer-d
ence which the Courier affects. The
fact is too apparent to the tax payers
Of Vanderburgh County, that ifothe
management Of affairs falls into the
hands of the Democracy, we will be
visited with the same character of
as in the Democratic coun- I
ties Of Warrick, Knox Dubois, and
Fl. e ;s.s. - 4,. = g.
+ sasEsf IN Il S1st II