The weekly Union times. [volume] (Union C.H., South Carolina) 1871-1894, 1883-07-06

|ff96os, a sum equal to the aggregate
of municipal taxes, which shall be
md collcc;ti u2,n the property or
employed or invested directly in
manufactures or enterprises; not in-
g herein the tax levied upon the land
I:1 Mhich the factories may be erected"
This act is not an evasion Of the Con
slit lion, we would like for the friends Of
Tbs; measure to let us know what would, in
ths opinion, constitute an evasion. IF the
| ptd rites mentioned in this subdivision con-
tri&te nothing to the sup port of the gov
crE9 9ont, why may not every species of,
pfel lrty be exempted by like evasion Of
EN4A ASonstitutian. and the whole burden of
1 takstion Be imposed upon labor. DJ these
pets Of the State, protected as they are sin
thcfnjoymcnt Of life, liberty and proper
~, contribute their share to the expense
of aleir protection ?" Most, if not all, of
thehsare regularly Incorporated companies
Are{they taxed as srequired by 2. Art.
XIt of the Constitution Is their exemp.
tiop provided for in the Constitution Did
the ffamers of the. Constitution, whoever
they were, imagine that;ts plain require
nekts would be n,ade the, subject of un-
blashing evasion, by those who were sworn
70 observe it +? BY what right, legal or
m9fpl, shall money making corporations bo
ssss fayored By yitke Legislature j? In gen.
eras asterus, thss9nly answer We have seen
is this By tddss ptips these uufac>
turing interests ffcS'Stz stiop; capital from
| abroad is induced to seek Investment in
them, aud the value of neighboring prop
erty is enhanced.
This conclusion assumes premise that
lwearc not prepared to admit To attribute
The prosperity Of manufactures in this State
TO the enactmens' of this law, is equivalent
to saying that the superior climate, the
splendid waterpower, the proximity of the
cotton mills, aud the large profits which
experience has shown may bo realized, has
no controlling influence that triffiug ex-
emption from about 8 mills tax of uncertain
duration, will induce investments of large
sums ofmoney in untried enterpri es. Will
any practical busin ,ss man affirm that he was
induced to put his money in any of these
Ventures by the trifing consideration that
|itwpaldbe exempt from a tax of 6 mills
for 10 years Is it reasonable to suppose
that single spindle has ever been added
to single mill by consideration, at once
SO triaing and uncertain ? Everv inves
tor knows that this law is liable at any time
to be repealed, or declared unconstitutional
and void by the courts, and would there,
fore require more certain and substantial
basis far his confidence, when he parted with
his capital. If he could be shown that
there wae money in the busness-a fair
profit to be realized on his investment, over
and above this caprcious exemption, he
might chuckle over the folly of & people,
who would thus necdlessly contribute to
his income, without the hope Of compcnsa.
ton, but he would laugh to scorn p.opo.
sition to invest with no higher inducement
tbaa this tax'exemp,ion affords.
The cotton mill statistics of this State,
show that their profits amount to from Is
to 81 yer cent. upon the capital. Is not
this sufficient inducement for investment
without the 8 mills exemption /? W. at
other business pays so we'll? If none, why
protcct'the most profitable business at the
expense of tho less profitable /?
But it is said that the establishment of
factories adds to the value of other property
in the vicinity. IF this be true, it only in
creases the burden of those who are so un
fortunate as to own this other property.
The productive capacity of such property is
not increased, and therefore its increased
market value only increasesthe onus oftax.
alton imposed on the owner. IF it shall
bcauswered that tho exemption will cease
at the expiration Of ten years, and then
large amount will be added to the taxable
property, and thus reduce the general rate,
we reply, that if this be true, it furnishes
no reason why such property shall no. pay
it's tax during the ten years, unless it can be
shown that tho exemptinn produced the
property. But, nj am rightly informed,
the exemption, as applied to cotson factories,
is practically perpetual. Machinery for the
manufacture Of cotton, 7 am told, usually
wears out in less than ten years, or is re-
placed by new inventions, and thus there Is
"a new snvestmeut under the act every time
Q anew-piece Of fmachinery is purchased aud
tho exemption begins to run from that