The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-11-26
Reformation in the Exemptions from
TnXes.

which its magnitude demands. The feeling
that some change is absolutely necessary in
regard to the tariff Of taxes is very general
one, and we judge there are few on the floor of
the House who do not reco gnize the many de-
fccts in the present system, and desire re-
form. While, however, all unite in wishing
a change, yet there seems to be but little bar-
mOny between them as to what change is
necessary. II is not unlike the naval council
Of commanders against t he Armada-eaoh
acknowledging it ruinous to lie to the wind
ward, but each had a different direction which
he deemed itproper 20 sail. Therefore, il will
require much mutual compromise to effect
plan generally satisfactory. There is one
thought on the subject which is being sighted
byall the writers who have discussed the ques-
tion. Zach favors a particular interest One,
with great justice and force, desires that the
tax on home manufactures be reduced.
Another, with equal fervor, calls on Congress
10 diminish the tax on sales of merchandise.
a third considers the tax on tobacco and cot
Ton exorbitaut Each can show strong grounds
I'm favor of reduction, but all work for the
good of their particular business. This is per-
feotly allowable, but there is one aspect which
does not appear in favor of any particular
trade. 1t is subject which directly benefits
all the masses Of the people, and one which
should first of all merit attention.
The increase of the amount of income
exempt, frSm 5000 to $1,000, was a step in the
right direction. 1t is surely better to have
the burden laid heavier on. the shoulders of
the capitalist than to make the poor man,
without sufficient to keep his family in COM
fort, pay $5 on every hundred over six.
But the exemption does not go far enough;
nor does it, in our opinion, do justice in the
spirit in which it was originally intended.
The design was to remove from the shoulders
of the man who had heavy expenses the addi
tional burden of taxation, when in reality all
his income was being expended in support of
his family. When, therefore, single man,
with no family, is allowed the same deduction
as a married man with large one, the essence
of the proposed exemption is lost.
In many cases single man with $1,000 can
much better afford to pay his share of taxation
than many a married man with $4,000. Yet in
one case the burden does not fall at ALL while
in the other two-thirds of his income is subject
to the startling tax of five per cent. What ooe
think WOald meet all the requirements of the case,
and do justice to al toould be TO abolish the $1,000
exemption, and, IN lieu thereof aIlow each man to
deduct from his income all that he has actually
expended during the gear in necesSaries for the
support of himself and family. By this revision
the theory of exemption would be perfected.
The tax would fall only on the surplus of the
income. If a man had no one but himself to
support, he would have to pay larger tax
than at present If he had awife and children,
he would be benefited by the change 1t
would relieve the most deserving, and do
much towards removing the anxiety which
racks an honest man in his efforts to meet the
demands of family duty and of law. Before
we would have the tax on either tobacco, or
manufactures or anything else reduced, we
would have Congress throw off the excessive
burden under which so many poor and indus
triOus heads of families suffer. Such an ac-
tion in their favor would be perfectly con-
sistent with all the enactments OF our State,
and doubtless with those of most other Com
mOnwealths. We have gone further in our
discrimination in favor of the married men.
We have a collateral inheritance tax of five
per cent. on the gross amount, which runs
against all those who are not married. In
that case the distinction in favor of the Bene-
diets is clear, but in the proposition we favor
exact justice is allowed to every one. If our
members will but give the matter the thought
it merits the advantages will be seen to in
grease with inspection. 1t will go far towards
popularizing the tax law. While the direct
Tax on the earnings Of every man is made to
apply to the surplus over necessary expenses,
he will not find It so difficult nor so disagreea-
ble to pay. AT the present rate of taxation we
are receiving,o an average, over $40, 900, ,OOOa
year more than is necessary to pay the interest
on our. national debt, while the pre-
sent year the excess will reach the
enormous sum of $3.50, 100000 1t may be
very grand for us to say that we are reducing
our debt at this rapid rate, but it is taxing
our people for glory which they would neve
be called upon to bear, if common sense, anC
not pride, was to dictate our laws. Let tn
debt for the present stand as it is. Let u
meet the interest. If, therefore, with prope
reduction of Government expenditures, we ca
effect decrease of one hundred and ih
million dollars from the amount received, an
yet meet our demands, we say that it is tn
duty of Congress TO at once threw off tn
e uNaA