The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1870-03-15
The Income Tax.

The income tax is an outrageous imposl-
ton. 1t relieves the rich and oppresses the
poor. According to the present programme
of taxation, the merchant who makes and
spends from ten to twenty thousand dollars
year may pay nothing to the government.
He may contend that he makes no ''gains. y
But his poor bookkeeper, who supports "a
family Oft children on two thousand dol
lars year, is required to pay fifty dollars
on his 'income." The big fly breaks through
the web in which the little fly is taken cap
tive
Now it is manifest that nothing can be
more unfair in legislation. Just govern
ments live upon the superhuous means OF the
people They do not levy upon "the chill
''dren's bread" Yet this is what our pre-
cious Congress is doing now. One is treated
as a criminal who lives by the brain and by
the pen. Grant has great respect for capi-
tai; he would create monied aristocracy
if he could; and he is encouraged by the pre-
cedents OF the party to which he belongs.
Under the present regime the bondholder
prospers, his employee starves
What makes this discrimination more obi
Gus is the fact that it is unconstitutional.
The tax was imposed in 1862. By an act OF
March, 1867, it was limited in its duration
to the year ending December 81, 1869. To
tl,; al; md
yond the close of the last year, Mr.. Schenck
has introduced into the House Of Represen-
tatives sort Of snap-legislation which is
worthy of the occasion and OF the man.
This gentleman, who is chairman OF the Com
mittee of Ways and Means, knows very well
that continued income tax cannot be laid
save by a new bill, and that, presented in
this form, the measure is certain Of defeat.
He has accordingly endeavored to accom-
plish this end by the introduction OF joint
resolution. Its design is, as he explains, to
declare ''the meaning of the laws now in
s'force to be that incomes accruing during
''the year 1870 are subject to the tax" That
tax cannot be extended in this way is ap-
parent to the simplest comprehension, and
that, should the resolution pass, it will be
universally resisted, is not less clear.
Indeed, under such provocation, the ques-
tion may naturally be asked whether that
tax ever was lawful. According to that
somewhat obsolete instrument, known as the
Constitution Of the United States, oil direct
taxes upon the people are to be apportioned
to the numbers of the population. The right
OF direct taxation extends, according to
Story, to the real estate and to the person
of the citizen solely. 1t is restricted to the.
land tax and the poll tax. Hence an in
quisitorial investigation into the private
affairs Of the citizen, as ground of taxa
tion, is nothing more or less than public op-
preston and robbery.
Had not the necessities of the country
oeen so urgent, we doubt not that the right
of the government to tax the incomes of its
citizens would have long since been subjec-
ted to the supervision of the courts. But
the laws have been silent amid the clash of
arms. The government has been allowed
the benefit of q constitutional doubt, and OF
the love and fear which its perils or its
prowess have inspired. But if this iniquit-
Gus and cowardly measure OF Mr. Schenck
is pressed, there will certainly be opposition
to it in the country at large. The state OF
the iuances do not any longer require the
maintenance of unpopular and illegal exac-
tions, least Of all, of one that spoils mot the
estate but the family whose means Of living
it ruthlessly bears away. We wonder that,
in the beginning the tax was not made more
equable. a citizen sustaining large fam
lily with his income should never have been
taxed as heavily as one having small fam
lily or no family at all. But it is not worth
our while to urge this consideration now.
The time when the tax expires by its own
limitation has arrived. And joint resolu-
tion must not and cannot galvanize it into
new lease of life.