Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-10-18
THE TAX QUESTION.
Letter from Hon. w. Il. Mcfarland i'm
Reply 10 EnOch Ensley.
%I,o

BepEy 10 EuOcn EnBIeY.
From the Humboldt journal.
HUMBOLDT, Sept. 80, 1S73.-In the Daily
appeal of the 18th instant sppears q six
column letter from the pen of Col. Enoch
Ensley, addressed to Governor Brown, on
the subject of taxation. The letter is well
written; bears upon it marks of thought
and careful preparation, and is, withal, as
strong presentation of that view of the
important subject of taxation as could well
be presented. There are in Tennessee two
systems of assessment and taxation prOmi-
nently before the people. One system Dro.
poses to tax immovable property only-tbat
is, to put all monetary burdens of State,
county and municipal governments upon
real estate. And this is the policy so ably
advocated by Colonel Ensley.
The other system is the one embodied
in the Constitution of the State, and fol-
lowed up in its assessment law by the pre-
sent Legislature, and necessitstes a uni
form assessment of taxes on all property,
real, personal and mixed.
This latter system we believe to be in
fnitely preferable and more just than the
former, for various reasons. We would,
however, if it could be done, exempt manu-
factories from taxation for five or ten years;
as an inducement to have them established
here and to give them better showing in
competing with older establishments, this
departure from the general rule might lead
to all sorts of manufacturing in the State,
and enable Us TO obtain goods, wares, ETC.,
within our own borders, and 10 keep our
cash at home instead of doing as we now
do-work hard all the oyear round" man,
woman and child, realize the money on our
labor and put it at once in transit to another
STATE to be used to enrich others and to sa-
tiate the appetite Of unknown and far off
speculation. Much more of real benefit
would result TO our people from thorough
knowledge of how 10 keep than how to
make money.
1t seems to us that the general principle
that every kind of property ought o bear
its portion of governmental BURDENS
founded in justice and accords strictly with
the genius of our free institutions. What
is the difference so far as citizens obliga-
tiun and ability is concerned, whether he
owns a hundred dollars in money, in q
horse, in dry goods, in groceries or In land,
Col Ensley says lay che burden OF taxation
mainly on the immovable-the land-for it
can't fee the State; but it is well known
that capital likes to escspe revenue de-
manded.
Wouldn't capital, If this policy was
adopted, shun investment in land, and thus
reduce its value until very little revenue
could be realized from ii? Owners of land
would desire to sell because they alone
must furnish the money to move the wheels
ofgovernment; but monied men, stockraisers,
merchants, grocers, bankers, bondhtlders,
shsVers, etc, would decline to buy, because
the property they possess and the business
they follow exempts them from taxation.
The result would be that the Homestead
and the farm would be abandoned, and the
money changers would take possession OF
the temple, and all because money, stock,
goods, groceries, carriages, buggies, watches,
jewelry, pianos, lumber, mahogany,
bureaus, sofas, paintings, Brussels carpets
and all other movable things else can run
away from or refuse to come into the pres
ence of the tax collector, while real estate
is immovsbly fixed, SO. that the collector
may, without danger to'the public prosperl'
ty, pile mountains of tax burdens upon it.
But it is confidently said that If movables
were left untaxed they would gather on
and about real estate in the cities and towns