The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-01-14
PLAIN TRUTH ABOUT THE INCOME
TAX,

PLAIN TRUTH ABOUT THE INCOME
From the N. Y. Times
1t is very clear that the Tribune does not
know what it means when it treats of fnan-
cial questions. 1t opens an old bag stuffed
with various crotchets, and gets itself 80
muddled among them that it can scarcely tell
one from the other. Is there an intelligent
boy in any public school in this country who
is incapable of perceiving the fallacy contained
in the following definition by the Tribune of
its ''views:'-
'The New York Times over and again asserts that
we propose the abolition OF the income tax We
have already corrected this msstatement. We pro-
pose the abolition of no tax-none whatever BY the
law, as it stands, the income tax is to be assessed
and collected once more, and that Is the end or It,
We think it right that it be not reimposed."
How is it possible to treat this sort Of ar
gument seriously? Is not the extinction of
a tax the same thing as its abolition? Or can
you do utterly away with anything without
abolishing it? The Tribune says, ''We don't
ask you to abolish the income tax-only don't
put it on any more" 1t might in precisely
the same way say to an agent in its employ,
''We don't say that we will not pay you any
more salary, only after next Saturday you
need not come here again. To recommend
that tax shall not be collected again is pre-
cisely the same thing as to recommend its
abolition; but the Tribune smiles in sweet
in constructing a ludicrous paradox it has
solved a financial problem. We never re-
member to have seen reasoning so absurd put
forward on a question of public interest. 1t
is worthy of tue famous Jack Drnsby himself.
Let us put the positions taken up by the
Tribune in q short form and one after the
other:-
l. We do not say abolish the income tax.
9. Only, never levy the tax again.
g. We are ODpOsed to the reduction of taxa
ton, believing that we ought to pay the debt
first.
4. But-take off fifty millions of taxation
at once.
Can any conjurer invent a better hocus-
pocus than this? And yet the Tribune is
sublimely unconscious of the inconsistencies
into which it wanders. 1t goes running after
first one will-o'-the-wisp and then another,
| and tumbles into bog after bog with as
much satisfaction as if it were on the road to
Paradise itself. We can understand that the
| I736ule'S legerdemain may confuse a few
| ignorant or bsetle-headed readers. But how
| can it pretend to tell intelligent men that in
demanding the withdrawal of tax it does not
ask for its abolition? 1t might as we'll advise
us all to say to the Government at once
''We don't ask you to do without revenue
but we won't pay any moro taxes"
| The Tribune says the income tax is COL
lected dishonesty. Then get rid of your dis
| III
tenant who was dishonest, would it burn its
| own house down to get rid of him, adopt
the less eccentric method of giving the ten
| ant notice to quit?
Again, our contemporary objects that the
tax is unequal in its operation. So are all
| taxes when you come to look into them. 1t
is harder for the poor man to pay tax upon
coal than for the rich man. We have our
selves shown some special inequalities of the
income tax which ought to be levelled away.
They, however, are not the fault of the i'm
post but only of the laundering, chaotic
manner in which it is levied Half of our
taxes were applied by the rule of thumb.
Scarcely anybody knew anything about such
subj iects. 1t is very hara-as a correspondent
in one of our banks truly says-that widow
should have to pay five per cent. to the Gov
ernment on her dividend of, say, thousand
dollars, without deduction, while those who
receive income from other sources may make
many deductions. This hardship is the re-
suit of sheer stupidity. A practiced inancier
would rectify all such injustices in week.
Again, it proves nothing against the merits of
any tax to say that some people evade 1T while
others are obliged to pay it, The very same
thing may be said of all taxes.
1t may not be possible to obtain an abso-
lutely true return of income from every man.
But it is quite possible to prevent rich man
avoiding the tax altogether. One OF the first
| duties OF government is TO collect lJS reVe-
nue. If ours has not yet succeeded in regard
to the income tax, it must try over again. but
until we get men engaged in the work who
! understand their business, we shall have to
grope about in the darkness.
The World appears to think that it has ad-
duced an unanswerable case against the in
come tax when it quotes certain passages
from speeches of Mr.. Gladstone adverse to
it. 1t seems to US that short answer dis
poses of this line of argument. Although
Mr.. Gladstone sees many objections to the
income tax, he is obliged to keep reimposing
it; he did so few months ago, and will do
30 again next March or April. Precisely the
same is it with our own Government. 1t
| wants a revenue, and to raise that revenue
I | it has brought into existence an exceed
/ ingly elaborate and complex system OF
taxation. 1t has taxed articles innumerable;
{ it has heavily taxed the industry of the
country, the food we eat the clothes
S | We wear; it has taxed everything we
can buy, make, grow, or import. Among
other things it has taxed income. We say
0 now that the time has come for the reduction
a of this large burden of taxation. The IN
Q bane says mo" and 'yes" in the same breathi
i take off no taxes till the debt is fully funded
t take off fifty millions instantly. We cannot
0 reconcile that Inconsistency, but what we DC
contend for is this:-H we can lessen the
: taxes by fifty millions, do not study the inte
t rests of only one set of Taxpayers, especially
: when the set is the very one which can best
afford to pay taxes. Lower the income
r tax by all means. Do not make any mar
!. | pay so much ufon earnings as upon realized