Orleans independent standard. [volume] (Irasburgh, Vt.) 1856-1871, 1868-06-19
The Tax on Whisky.

We publish in another column, an
article from the New York Tribune
on the Whisky tax, which we COM
mend to the attention Of our readers,
although we do not exactly know what
the editors are driving at. 1t is plain
enough, however, that the writer is
opposed to the enormous tax of 81
per gallon that is now put upon it, and
that it deplores the influence and pow
er of what is called the "Whisky Ring"
For one we think the tax upon whisky
is altogether too high. We believe
there is no good reason for it; but
there are many good reasons that can
be adduced for very great reduction
Of the tax. We believe that if the tax
could be reduced to fifty cents on eve
ry gallon manufactured the income to
the government would be vastly more
than it now is, for the very simple rea-
son that the temptation to defraud the
government would not be so powerful
as now. Distillers would then come
out and work by daylight, and would
not retire to the caves and dens of our
cities in order 10 avoid the assessor
and the collector. As the law now
stands, there is every inducement to
commit fraud. The nrst cost VI d
barrel Of whisky, we are told, is about
So aud the tax upon it is $50 more.
The advocates of reduction say that
if put at so cents a gallon it would
have tendency to make the manufac-
turers honest, because honesty would
then pay as WELL or better than ras-
cality. They would not then take a
false oath so easily. Under the pres.
ent arrangement if the manufacturer
has two barrels out of every three
seized and confscated by the govern
ment, he still makes big speculation
on the third. This our readers cal
see at a glance. 1t costs but $50 t.
make the three barrels; if then tn
third barrel escapes the vigilance Of
the officers, it can be sold for $3.50 t.
retailers-giving profit of $50 afte
throwing away the two barrels. Blu
two thirds of the liquor is not seized
no not one barrel in twenty is seizeC
What then must be the profits of tn
business? Is it any wonder that tn
whisky Ring" can find means an
men to buy up or overawe the legi
lation of the country? Reduce til
tax to so cents and it puts an end
smuggling all along our border, b.
cause it will not pay enough profit
risk running the gauntlet of a brigaC
oflynx eyed seizing officers. 1t woul
do more, and better. 1t would abe
ish the necessity ofkeeping more tha
q fourth of those unclean cormoran
who now draw heavy salaries fro
the toll and sweat of the industri
classes, and thus prevent an increa
if it does not reduce the volume of oil
national debt. Why keep the tt
where it is? 1t pays the governme
merely nothing. The first year t
income was little less than $4,000
900; the second year it was less TIL
$40,000,000, while last year we thi
it was but $12,000,000. These figur
show to us that the distillers are gro
ing more dishonest and cunning,
that the government officers are me
lax in their duties. No-the tru
is, the enormous tax of $500 per e
Ion on whisky is really premium
rascality.
Since the above was written we
that the house of representatives |
begun to act in the matter, and Il
bill is to be reported to that be
this week, which will, beyond dou
reduce the tax to fifty cents. ]
leaders of the house are .determil
to break up the whisky thieves at
hazards. We hope they may succe