The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1871-04-11
s.ThS. D;o1Ibic Taxi !

Gis .DSs;ssls Ts1 90;
/ Ma EpTloasiT The subject of staYationlI|
i 4 Ao one vh n, tRs hPlds Il FE1. ot
the State: ss;v, iH sisps, & g 4
g. l., sBecause We have no approximation
ii the Government that simp5aes the,
tax. .t'' y y u; Y - si-ifi'ss2s & st "
2. Because the amount extprted from
us is enormously disproportionate to the
actualI lInecessities Of the State.
g.. Because, the amount .wrang from us
is so great that ne are not only unable to
acquire wealth, but are not able even to
meet our necessary expenses from year
TO year.
4. Because the enorinity of the amount
exacted from nc is concealed from the
world by.an artificial system Of valuation
of property, by which from fifty to three
hundred per cent. is added to the actual
market value.
5. Because the money SO extorted is
not expended for our benefit, but results
In costly gew.gaws at the State House,
splendid eqnipages sported by Office
holders, and the mushroom-grown opu-
lence of those through whose hands the
money passes.
All this we have endured patiently
endured as no people before have ever
enduted in q republican government,
But our masters now Gull on us to paw
this Same enormous tax tpice in the same
year. Is it surprising that we begin to
grow desperate?
We are told that the double tax is
merely the result OF a change of time
made for oil,' benefit and convenience.
We are frank to confess that we cannot
believe that suoh motive would have
the slightest weight with our law-givers.
at any rate, tce desire no such benefits ut
their hands.
1t suoh was the motive, instead Of
desire Of speedy plumber, why did not
the Legislature enact that no tax should
be required of US in March, 1872, but
that the same might be paid in Novem-
ber, 1872? This would have changed
the time without doubling the tax, and
have produced one tax each year. The
reply to this is, [ suppose, that the tax
paid in March this year was only to
cover expenditures to March, 1872, and
hence there would be no provision for
the six months prior to November, 1872.
W . nloTC4y WOpCS CCOHOWty WOuk0 6uuDl6
the tax already paid to meet all expenses
to November, 1872; and that we're the
government in our hands, this amount
would suffice for the expenses of three
years. But admit that the taxes already
paid this year will only suffice for the
period ending March, 1879, does it not
then follow that the period from Novem-
Der, 1871, to March. 1879. is toice pro-
vided for by the additional tax required
in November, 1871? Bearing in mind
that still another tax is required in No
vember, 1872, can any one, (even Afr.
| IYhiAe'aore,) hive the effrontery to denY
that'G period of six month is ttoice oro-
vided for?
If our legislators had intended to
change the time Of payment to moro
convenient time, instead of providing an
ertra fund for plunder, do they ask us to
believe that they had SO little sense rs
not to know that their object would have
been attained by requiring hdlf ta.s to
be paid in March, 1872. and then aphole
fdr in November, 1872? Let Mr. JYAu-
te.more try and see if he can get out of
thisresult. The expenses Of government
are already provided for to March, 1872;
from that time to November, 1872, is
one.half year; provide for this one half,
and November, 1872, is reached.
Conclusion-If the powers TINT be ex-
pect us to ncquiesce, let them SO modify
the present programme that only one
hag of the tax proposed bo collected,
and that the time OF payment be March,
1872, instead Of November, 1871. Then
let the usual tax be required in Novem-
Der, 1872. and each subsequent year in
the same month. We will then in t,co
and one-haF gears, have paid Too and one
AaF taces; and November will be at
tanned as the regular time for the collec-
tion of taxes.
You, Mr.. Editor, cAn attest that this
is written by moderate, law abiding
CITIZEN.
Mn. EDlTon: I am in receipt of let