Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-05-21


unpaid,) twenty-ene million nine hundreC
\ Thousand pounds Of tobacco to The cities O
Baltimore, Philadelphia, New Y ork and Bos
ton, upon which the tax (if not exported
is thirty-two cents per pound. OF thil
amount two million two hundred Thousand
pounds are withdrawn from the bonded
warehouses for expectation, and the re-
mainder, nineteen million seven hundred
thousand pounds, is sold for home con
sumption, the agents of the Virginia man
ufacturers paying the taxes and charging
them to their principals in Virginia. Thi;
gives an additional tax paid by the Virgins
manufacturers on tobacco, of Sc, 100000
making the total tobacco tax paid by that
State S10,663.911, and its total internal rev.
enRe tax $11,6l9,272, or 1891 for each per
son. 1t further shows that while Virgins
is the eleventh State in valuation Of prop
erty, and the tenth in population, it is the
fourth in the amount of internal, beg par
don, intended to say internal, revenue
paid.
Now, sir, these two States, Massachu-
sets and Virginia, were two of the original
States which formed this Union, the two
that were foremost in the achievement OF
the independence of the colonies, and in
the formation of the Constitution which
forbids unequal taxation. In 1860 they
were nearly equal in wealth and popula-
ton. A decade of war and Radical rule
"a worse misfortune) has decreased
the property of one from $751;
100000 to S356,000,000, while it
has increased that of the other
from S777,000,000 to S1,849, 00O,-
600. I ask you, sir, what plea can be ad-
vanced to justify this infamous system Of
taxation upon tobacco, by which Massachu-
sets is made to pay one twenty-fifth of one
per cent, and Virginia is made to pay three
per cent? Why the inhabitant of Massa-
chusetts, with an average wealth Of 1921,
should only pay thirty cents tax upon to-
bacco, and one in Virginia, with an average
property of 1888, should pay 1891 upon the
same article?
Sir, in 1860, when this Government had
existed over seventy years under Demo
cratic rule, the man in Massachusetts and
in Virginia possessed about the same aver
age amount Of property, and the taxes upon
each were the same. Now, sir, at the close
of twelve years of Radical rule and mis-
management, we find that the one has more
than three times the value of property pos
sessed by the other, while the impoverished
tnhabitant of Virginia pays upon tobacco
ninety-four times the amount Of taxes paid
by the rich speculasor of Massachusetts.
This comparison may be carried through
all the States, and the same inequality is
manifest, showing as clearly as figures can
show that the tax on tobacco should be
abolished. But, sir, l have been arguing
upon the hypothesis that the producer pays
this tax, and to meet any assertion that it
is paid by the consumer | propose now to
examine the operations of the law from that
standpoint.
find, sir, that the total revenue collect
ed from tobacco the last fiscal year was
$50, 578 ,907, snd that of this sum, 20,250,-
600 was collected upon that grade of tobac-
co that paid thirty-two cents per pound tax.
This proves that sixty-three million pounds
Of that class of tobacco was manufactured
and used in the country. The best
information l can obtain upon the
subject leads me to believe that
allowing fair compensation to the produ-
Ger and the manufacturer, the average cost
of this tobacco at the factory, ready Tor
market, would be forty cents per pound.
Allowing one hundred per cent. for trans
portatiOn, insurance, ami profit to the job
Der, the wholesale dealer, and the retail
dealer, the consumer would purchase his
tobacco at the average price of eighty cents
per pound.
But the manufacturer has to pay the
thirty cents per pound tax, he has to pay
his license, and to purchase the civility of
the revenue officers who examine his
Sooks, and whose viSitations he may expect
at any time, so that with the increased
capital employed, and the risk of black
mail to be levied by thieving revenue
officials, the cost of the tobacco at the man
is doubled, and the same proportion |
OF increase is carried through by all who |
handle it, unit it reaches the consumer |
at the average price of Sl.60 instead of |
eighty cents per pound, thus extracting |
from their pockets over fifty million dollars |
in addition to the tax. Another wo"d, and |
[ shall pass from the subject. would like |
to inquire upon what principle the Govern |
ment discriminates in this tax against its |
own citizens; why the merchant in Lon |
don, Paris or Berlin can buy tobacco free |
Of tax, while our merchant is burdened |
with this tax of sixteen and thirty-two |
cents per pound? Is this what gentlemen
call protecting home industry"
Mr.. Speaker, shall now adduce some |
facts relating to the other tax which l have |
proposed to repeal, but shall cite only
single example to prove my statements. |
Illinois, with 2,539,S9l inhabitants and /
764 000,00 worth of property, pays a tax |
Oh spirits of SI0,66G, S2S; while New York, |
with 1882, 759 inhabitants and property |
valued at 81, 949, 100000, pays only 81, 0S2,-
556. In New York the tax paid is not one
iO1lor for aaab 1Norcpr yNbiIo IN IlirCiO
exceeds four dollars to each person. In the !
one case it is less than one quarter of one |
per cent upon the property of the State, in |
he other it is one and 0ne-third per cent.
illinois, with one sixteenth of the popula-
ion and one twentieth of the wealth pays
nearly One-fourth of the entire II venUe col
ected from spirits.
desire now to call your attention to the
unjust operations of the tax upon stills. No
distinction is made on account of capacity
Dr. value. The still that produces its one
gallon of spirits per day, is taxed to the
same extent as the still that pOduees its
)ne hundred gallons per day. The man
who invests his one hundred thousand dol
ars in the manufacture of whisky is taxed
no more for the privilege than he who in
rests but one thousand dollars. Is this JUS
ice? Is it not discrimination against the
Door, and in favor of the rich man Is this
n conformity with, or is it not in direct
violation of the Constitution of the United
States? Does it not drive the man with
mall means out of the field ofthis branch
If manufacture and enterprise?
And then, sir, look with me at the man
Ter of collecting these various taxes, the in
quitous espionage to which dealers are con
Iemned both day and night. The Spanish
nquisition was never more of a terror to
he poor peasants of the mountains of Eu-
ope, in what we deem and speak of as the
Dark Ages, than the insulting petty revenue
fiicials, pulled up by little brief authori-
2, who are sent out among these poor dis
illers to inspect their books, their stills,and
heir private life, with authority to collect
be taxes, arrest and impriSon the citizen,
nd destroy and burn up his distillery, the
tile accumulated property, perhaps,
f life time Of honest toll; and this :
imply because he is unable to fully under
-and and comply with the provisions of
w as to the construction Of which the
blest jurists of the country disagree, or, ]
-hich is fully as likely, to purchase from
he bantling officers sent among them re-
eff from the outrage and insult to which
ley are subjected by paying out their l
money. This, in itself, is an l