Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1874-04-17
AssEssHENr AND TAXATION.

Mr.. NJ. T. Williamson, a Representa-
tive of Shelby county in the last Gen.
eral Assembly, has put forth a pamphlet
entitled Tennessee Compared with
Other States" urging as a mode of re-
form the establishment Of State
Board of Equalization, In the Fay
etterille Observer of the 10th inst. We
find a thr~ee-column criticism of this
pamphlet by Mr. d. j. Noblitt, who was
the Representative from Lincoln and
Giles. Mr.. Williamson having speci-
fed Lincoln and Moore as counties
wherein he regarded the assessment as
too low, and needing revision by
some such body as a State Board
of Equalization, Nh. Noblitt takes a
belt of seven counties, running from
the Cumberland mountains down the
valleys of Duck and Elk rivers, as fol-
lows: Moore county, average assess
ment on the acre, 1857; Bedford.
Sl8.6S; Lincoln, $l0.99; Franklin,
SS.4S; Giles, Sl4.40; Marshall, SlS.36,
and Maury, S20.S2. Average for the
seven counties. S13.9l per acre. He
next cites a block Of seven counties in
West Tennessee, embracing the cities
of Memphis and Jackson, as follows:
Shelby, average assessment per acre,
SIS; Upton, s1O.s5; Haywood, s1O.3s:
Madison, 1894; Fayette, S94S; Harde-
man, S6.39; McNairy, 1857. Averagefor
the seven counties, S10.23 per acre.
Mr.. Noblitt states that the Middle Ten
nessee counties cited are largely CON-
| posed of hills and barrens, or lacking
in railroad facilities, while those of
West Tennessee are washed by the
great Father of Waters, railroads in
abundance, soil unsurpassed by any,
lie well and Will produce in abundance
any crop the husbandman may see tit
to plant" From these premises he ar
CUES that Mr.. Williamson should do
better at home before complaining of
Middle Tennessee. Toward the close
of his review Mr.. Noblitt makes the
following remarks on the general SUBJ
ject of taxation:
"a fair andequitable rate of taxation
can never be obtained by your State
Board. neither can it be under the pre-
sent Constitution. 1t is too discrimin-
ating; it exempts a thousand dollars of
personal property fIOm taxation, which
is unjust and wrong; 1t is oppressive TO
the poorer class and a protection or an
exemption to the wealthy; there are
none butthe wealthier portion that have
a thousand dollars personally. Men
that own small farms or tracts OF land
have to pay on all their realty; the
small farms are assessed higher than
large bodies of land-thcse small farm
ers never have a thousand dollars worth
of personal property; they pay nothing
on personally, but the high assessment
of their lands make them pay more tax
in proportion to their wealth than the
large farmer.
1.-The large farmers or large property
holders of any kind pay less taxes IN
proportion to what they are worth than
the man Of less wealth under Il con-
stitution, from the simple fact, men
are not taxed in proportionto whatthey
are worth. l know it is urged that the
object was to protect the weaker class
of society; but it is false in theory and
practice. If the large farmer rents his
land, he adds the taxes to the rents; If
he hires labor to cultivate, he deducts
the taxes from the laborer's wages; If
he is a money lender, he adds the taxes
to the rate of interest.
sThe merchant upon the cost of his
goods, which is heavy on both the mer-
chant and the consumer, the mer-
chant pays an ad valorom tax and a
privilege, which would be considerable
margin to the consumer. All goods
that are sold IN this State have been
taxed four times before they reach the
consumer-taxed twice In the hands of
the wholesale merchant, twice IL the
hands of the retail, and the tax comes
out Of the pockets Of the consumer, and
they are generally the laborers of the
country, IOf TIE wealthy Dos Dtt A.rlS
at retail. By that means they payl less
tax as consumers.
Every mai ought to pay on what
he is worth, let 1t consist IN what 1t
NAV. The man that has five hundred
dollars worth of any kind of personal
ty ought to pay as much as the man
that has five hundred dollars worth of
land, and the man that haE FIVE hun
dred dollars worth of merchandise
should pay on five hundred dollars
worth, and nc more.
You Will say the interest on thepub-
lie debt must be paid, funding or not
That is right, for funding Is a question
of the past; IN future we must look to
the payment Of interest," and the hqui-
dation of the public debt, with the eaf-
rent expenses of the State"