Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1868-11-29
OUR MERCANTILE INTERESFs-AN
APPEAL To THE LEGIsIATTJRE

-~N-" Al
tn. wo,ds. uOn sales of mer
by merchants, two cents on the
collar, on its invoice cost at the place
where purchased"
We have before alluded to this unwise
and unjust tax on the mercantile commu-
NIFTY 1t is respectfully submitted that
the operation of this clause has shown it
TO be grievous burden on the labor and
interests ola large and important class Of
our iellow-citizens, and that, in its results,
It fails to accomplish the object for which
1t was intended, and further, that its |
bearing and influence upon the finances of |
the State, and the general interests Of its |
citizens, alike in a commercial, manu-
featuring and agricultural point of view,
are Injurious.
In the first place, the injurious dis
elimination which this clause works in
favor Of merchants in cities of other
States, for instance, Louisville, Cincin-
natl, and st. Louis, is daily forcing across
this State, and diverting to the cities
above named and others, all the large
and lucrative wholesale trade from the
States of Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi
and Arkansas trade that by position
legitimateIy belongs to the merchants of
this State. This trade, so important TO
the interests Of the mercantile class, and
indirectly to the entire people of the
State, follows the law which governs it,
and pursues the course which its interest
dictates. 1t goes to cities the laws of
whose States enable their merchants to
undeIsell those of this State by the
amount Of this tax. In Ohio the tax on
this privilege is fraction of one per
cent, and in Kentucky it is still less,
and their county tax on this privilege is
in proportion. These are the States with
which we are brought most directly in
competition, and tho difference in this tax
in favor Of their merchants affords them
fair profit tc that amount. 1t is not
difficult to perceive the unjust discrimi~
nation here wrought against the home
merchant, and the great disadvantage at
which he is placed when competing with
those Of Louisville and Cincinnati.
Now, this loss Of trade, and the con-
sequent diminution Of the amount of bust
ness transacted by the merchants Of this
State, reduce very largely the amount
ofpurchases made by them, and to that
amount deprives the State Of all revenue
whatever derivable from the tax on this
privilege. If this tax were placed at fair
rate, enabling Tennessee merchants to
compete successfully with the foreign
dealer, the business of home merchants
would be largely increased, and the
amount of purchases upon which the
tax would be paid, would yield much
larger revenue than the present system.
We think this position, founded as it is
on facts and daily experience, cannet be
successfully controverted.
In its effects directly upon the interests
Of home merchants, this law is also par
ticulsrly onerous, in the fact that it gives
to nonresident dealers, at points in this
State great advantages over the resident
merchants at tbs same place. This can
be readily appreciated when the fact is
known that the tax npon a resident
dealer for purchases for sale TO the
amount Of $1,000 is $500, while the
law accords a nonresident the same
privilege upon the payment, through his
agent, Of $50.
This is certainly an exaction which no
wise State policy lays upon its own citi-
zens. Indeed, it is the highest dictate of
such a policy to conserve the interests Of
its own citizens preferably, and we sub
NIT that this law does not do so.
Again this feature Of the present tax-law
on privileges is open to grave and serious
objection, by reason Of the great induce
ment which it offers 10 individuals of a
not very high grade Of honesty to eyads
the law. The payment Of S35 upon every
thousand dollars Of purchase is avoided
by failing to accou@ to the tax collectors
the true amount Of purchases, and while
this is an evil in the fact that it encour-
ages disrespect for the law, and dishon-
esty in dealing, it also detracts from the
amount of revenue received into the trsSsr
ury. The reduction of the present tax, en-
sbling competition on fair grounds as be-
fore stated, would deprive parties of mo-
tive for this dishonorable course, while it
would increase the revenus by increas~
ing the amount of purchases as before
shown, and rendering it much more prob
able that the due amount of tax levied,
would be collected and paid into the oof>
fers of the State. We submit that it is
sound policy to place no law on the
statute book which appeals to cupidity
and offers premium for its own lnfrac
ton and fraud upon the State.
Another evil is that the tax upsn the
merchandising privilege induces customs
erS in this State, who are informed and
understand the fact that resident mer-
chants are compelled, in self defense, to
add the two per cent. tax to to their sell
ing prices, to purchase abroad their indi-
vidual supplies. The effect Ofthis course
is to deprive the State revenue Of the tax
on purchases, which otherwise would be
made by merchants, and further, TO cur
tail the mercantile business, and thus far
to impair the prosperity Of the people and
the general interests OF the State.
Further again: This law is liable TO
evasion, and offers a motive for it in a
still. more fragrant method, and in this
wise A wholesale dealer of another
city personally or through an agent in a
city in this State, can sell bill Of mer-
chandise 10 a resident merchant, and