The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1876-10-26
I 7Neut411a
Whisky Sttl|iilgS
CONNIVANCE OF REPUDLI,
; CAN OFFICIALS. II )
Exposures by Hon. Binkley.
Extract from Speech at Milwautee.l

|.H J. j
Extract from Speech at Milwaukee,
OF the thousand kinds of frauds, con-
slider whisky frauds alone, and none Of
them later than 1870. Nor will |, at
present, say any thing of whisky frauds
save only Of oneofrarticular description
though vastly the greatest of all. And
now to the theme.
The scheme Of ofargument is this: The
producer Of whisky was to pay a tax of
80 much gallon for every gallon made,
subject to a drawback on what little was
exported. The revenue books show how
many gallons were reported as taxable
!, But great deal was produced that was
not reported. If I'VE could show how
many more gallons were produced than
were reported for taxation, we would
know how many gallons had escaped
the tax Of so much gallon. 1t might
be hundred gallons or ten thousand
gallons, or 1OO,0O0,0O0 gallons, or l,00O,-
100000 gallons-no matter how much or
how little, there would be no mistaking
the amount if we could just know what
was the production. But uncertainty on
this point-the aggregate production on
any given year-is the big fog in which
lie hidden the most colossal frauds of the
age. The tax was laid in 1862, We
know for each year, and for the whole
period since, what amount of money was
received
ON DISTILLED SPIRITS, VI i
And what number of gallons were report
ed for taxation. But we do not know what |
was produced. Moreover, it is not possi-
BILE to know with precision. | think |
there is a method of reckoning which |
will bring us very near to it. But shall
not attempt it. We do not need it. | |
will adopt method which, after making
all possible allowances, will demonstrate |
that the production must have been at |
least what shall allege. The method is |
this: There has been tax on sales be-
sides the tax on production. If we know |
how much tax money was paid on sales, |
we can compute bow much was sold
and it is a settled assumption that year
with year, the production and sale are.
equal. For example, ifenough tax money
on sales was received to cover the sale of
say one hundred and thirty million gal
Ions, it must be accepted asa demonstra-
ton that at least hundred millions of
gallons were sold, and, consequently, that |
many gallons produced. But this result
is corrOhorated by another, which | will
use, viz that as nobody can fairly dis
pute that the production between 1850
and 1870 was Of as high a proportion as
between 1850 and 1850, the latter ratio is
Justly applicable. .s1a'v-raaaa
In 1862, when war expenses were
million a day, the Internal Revenue Law
was framed. The burdens, afterwards
80 heavy, were then comparatively light
Experience in other countries had shown
that consumption was not diminished
by
TAXING HABITUAL LUXURIEs.
And the trainers of the law examined
the statistics of tobacco and distilled
spirits. The latter was an especially
promising source of revenue having
steadfast ratio of annual increase of pro-
duction and consumption, about nine per
cent. per annum a generation back. The
figures for the then just ended decade
being, in 1850. Al, 1854 724 gallons, in 1850,
88O02,988 gallons. This had been at
rate which at the end of the next de-
cade, that is in 1870, would yield over
l75,OOO,O00 gallons, and accordingly they
calculated on about s, 100000 gallons year
Wv Increase, While | think their ratio
has been greatly exceeded, l neyerthe-
ess a6out It as abundaDtly sufficient for
ny purpose. We will, therefore, assume
br the present regular increment Of
100000 gallons d year as basis of com.
n,tation, and after comparing animal
pluductionson that basis with the official
returns Of production, and recovering
from our amazement enough to go on,
we will demonstrate that the annual pro-
duction must have been at least that
much. .III3liCCL
On the 100000 gallon yearly addition
we would have, IN 1861, 10000, ,9S8 gal
Ions. But drop the giblets and count it
104,000,000 Sallons. Then in 1852 it
have been 100000. There was not
yet any whisky tax, and, consequently,
no motive to, conceal production, and ac-
cordingIy, contemporaneous estimates
were about that figure. But the next
year, 1853, was practically WIHJ H1tl,
THE FIRST YEAR OF TAX, 'ra
And ever since the motive to conceal
production has been sostrong that in the
compendium of the census of 1870 there
is not even an attemptto give the auum- ,
ber of gallons produced. Atthe s 100000
yearly increase the production of 1858
should have been 120,OOO0O0 gallons; of
1854, 128,000,000 ! of 1865, 1874, 900, 900; of
1866, 144,000,000; of 1857, l52, 100000; of !
1868, 160.000.000; of 1869, 1853, 600, 900; of /,
1860, 176,00000O. have not the least
doubt it was much more Commissioner
Delano himself admits in his report of
1870 that the producing capacity of Ii
Censed stills alone, not inClnding illicit ;
stills, nor fruit stills, was 203, ,9l2 800 gal
Ions for ten months'Srun. Other reasons :
could be given, bnt this argument must /
be simple, 3ea1t ga sa /
During the years 1868 and 1854 the tax = \
passed successively from 20 cents to 60
cents, to $3.50 per gallon. The table also 4
shows enormous discrepancies between =
even what whisky was reported and 2
what tax was collected on it. This is not =
my funeral II sufices us to take their +
receipts from their own records. @ l
will now read table (pronouncing 1"
only round numbers) in which have set 8.
out how much distilled spirits must have y
been actually produced each year, how II II
much was reported as all that was pro- g q
duced, the,rate of tax at the time, and L =
what sum only was paid, and deductively u y
the loss of dollars in each year from 1858 T.
to 1870, both inclusive. The loss | call J"
loss both
TO THE PEOPLE AND TO THE TREASURY, u
And I invite your particular attention to in
this point r.
The fact is notorious that from the ~ q,