Whig and tribune. [volume] (Jackson, Tenn.) 1870-1877, 1873-06-28
rss Tax Accumulation.

Tss Tax Accumulation. 3
Until examining this fsVs fer the !
purpose of giving list Of taxes, We 4
rad not given il a special attention. ID
But a close review OF its provisions I
reveals q most loose, seBseless and
impracticability By its I
q man is required TO pay
double taxes on much Of his proper I
ty. A buys q piece of property, and
sells il on a credit, taking note for
it. Here the property 10 taxed in |
the hands of the purchaser, and the
former owner ia taxed on the note
which he gets for it. Further, a
man sells a tract Of land and holds
the title until the purchase money 1
is paid, taking s note therefor, he
pays n tax OH the land while the le-
gal title is ia him, aud also on the
note takef for II. This Is clearly
an outrage and unconstitutional
never contemplated by the C0fistltu-
tion-and is not uniform taxation.
Certainly the property sold snd the
note given for IL canifOt both be tax
ed. 1t is ah outrage on the rights ]
OF trade. Simply by Ioaning mon |
ey it Is twice taxed-Once in the |
hands Of the borrower, and once in /
the hands Of him who took q note
or held an open Gcrount for il a
gainst the borrower. Thus it is |
that all (, ldc Is taxed to the amount |
of the property involved where
credit is given. A man is required
to give in TO the Tax Assessor all
his old accounts and claims that
4 - IN
definite number Of years. Mer-
chants who have old accounts, who'll
IL worthless for fifty years, must
give them in. lie Is coInpeied 70
90 over his books, for all time, and
sum them up accurately, or be tax
ed twenty-five per cent. in addition,
or else perjure himself. The En-
/ glish language docs not furnish
words fit to express just condem-
nation of such a law. We do not
believe that the abOmination can be
enforced in our courts. We do not
believe that property sold on a cred
il and the promise to pay for IL are
both property that can be taxed
Its worse than the stamp act, which
only taxed a note This law taxes
you without the note upon the open
account. If you go TO another State
and sell a drove OF horses on cred
it, while they are taxed in the
hands of the purchaser by the laws
Of that State, you are taxed here on
the claim you hold for them. IL,
hence, is clear that all trade is taxed
equal to the amont of property
transferred. If sold for cash il il
taxed in your pocket, or il on cred
; il IL is all the same. Now, IN ouI
view of the case, this is taxing in.
dustry in manner best calculated
! TO paraTyze IL. IL is clear that nc
legislation can, under our constitu
. ton, prevent a man from buying Ol
selling bread, food or clothing. II
cannot prevent a man from hiring
the blowing of his fields. II cannot
, prevent agriculture. Then il can
? not tax these things, for il has beer
laid down many years ago, by tn
| Judges of the Supreme Court OF TN
. United States. that what may no
= be suppressed by law cannot b,
: taxed. How, then, can a man b
e taxed on contracts made for carry
= ing on agriculture? What, then
e shall be said of the makers Of such
l law as this? A more mOnstrou
{ folly was never enacted in the legis
: latiOn OF HeathendOm- Those VIII
@ framed or voted for the imposition
: were blind or reckless of duty 4
= perpetrate such an outrage on thei
}, | constituency. We lay down thi
p principle, that the legislature ma
b tax privileges; that agriculture
= not a privilege but a natural right
4 and a man cannot be made to pay
: tax on the produce OF his lands o
i on the sale he makes of t. IL agri
e cultural product in the hands of In
h | farmer or his veDdee may not
@ | taxed, why can the account agains
: his vendee be taxed? II this can b
e done, ell he has TO do is to put tn
G tax on his Vehdee when he sells 3
: him. This is but doing indirect
0 Nv that which may be done directly
!. The truth is, Ethis law IL mos
e incOnsiderate folly, and those VIII
s made il should be held strictly n
Il sponsible for il. Let them be n
d membered. The hsrd-Pressed MAJ
# compelled to sell his land on a cred
n il and holding title for his security
r must pay tax on his land, and ais
q on the claim against the purchaser
= Here is a double tax on necessity
n Tennessee says, "oppress necessity
o this is the motto of 1873. Let
d be remembered. We are special
: sorry for Trustees, Administrator
s Executors, Clerks of Courts, ReceiV
d ers, &c, and their beneficiaries.-
Il They are compelled TO review thei
= trusts, give 4 full account of thci
s. stewardship to the Tax Asscsso
z without any remuneration for sue
d extra duty. And we call upon then
C and the merchant, and all who hav
/ large complicated business o
S hand, when they so TO swear 20 a
i accurate statement Of their business
e often going back fifty years, TO rG
J, member the makers OF the law tina
g | offers to them the alternative of pei
c jury or this imposition The trut
is that very few men understan
their business as they should dc
but to be forced to state it with az
curracy on oath is tyranny. Beside
e il often exposes a mans privat
f business that may be ruinous TO hi
q credit, when, il let alone, he coul
b go on successfully. The more it j
3 Investigated the more Odious it az
8 pears, and the only consolation I
s be derived is the reflection that w
a will have another Assembly of Rep
( resentativcs after another year, ant
: that memory may not torsake u.s.
4 Winchester Home Journal.