Democratic Northwest. [volume] (Napoleon, Ohio) 1869-1894, 1883-08-16
The Scott Law.

the INgndt, OF last week, taxes US 10
task for refusing TO give absolute ap-
proval to theso-called Scott liquor law.
The Republican candidate for governor,
in his Hamilton speech, said that this
law was not perfect, and clearly implied
that subsequent legislation is necessary
to make it perfect. Wherein the inn
perfection consists he does not inform
us. Should it be prohibition Should
it be graded license or tax? Should it
be repeal? He answers not. We agree
with Judge Foraker that the law is i'm
perfect, but we dare give our reasons
for the faith that is i'm us:
lst. The tendency of the law is to
immortality: If, as is generally conced-
ed, evils result from the sale of intexi-
eating liquors, then the Scott law fur
nishes all facilities for the spread of
these evils. Previous to our present
constitution, and before the enactment
of the laws of 1854, it was unlawful to
sell intoxicating liquors to be drank on
the premises where sold, except by tav-
ern keepers, who by reason of their fit
ness, the public convenience and the
payment of license duty, were per-
mitted to so sell. The constitution of
1852 forbid this license, and the laws of
1854 declared such sales unlawful and
affixed penalties for their violation.
The Scott law not only reinstates the
old tavern keepers license, but extends
the privilege to all persons, suitable or
unsuitable, who pay to the public rev.
enues 5000, and repeals the laws of 1854,
removes all penalties and dgives absolute
free trade in the traffic.
md. 1t inaugurates into our system
of taxation dangerous principle. AL
though the supreme court says that the
law could not be sustained as a mere
tax or revenue measure, it yet sustains
it, and engrafts into'our revenue system
the principle of specific taxation. Un-
der our old constitution this was per-
and cow was cow, whether
the crumpled horned old brindle of the
poor widow or the blooded Jersey of the
wealthy stock fancier, each paid the
same tax; under that constitution occu-
pations and business pursuits might al
50 be taxed. The constitution of 1852,
however, provided against this injus-
tice and declared that; claws shall be
passed taxing by a amJorm rule, all
credits, investments in bonds,
stocks, joint stock companies, or other
wise; and also all real and personal
according to its true vdlue in
money!" If the principle of the Scott |
aw is sound, where must it stop? If |
,he business or occupation of dealing in
liquors can be taxed, the business of the
lruggist or dry goods merchant may al
70 be taxed-monopolies may be thus
Ormed, all revenues required by the
State be raised in this manner and prop
'rty go exempt. Who, then must pay
he taxes? Not the man who purchas-
's the permit to engage in business, for
his cost will be added to the commod-
ty which is sold and the purchaser or
onsllmer in the end pays the tax while |
wealth goes exempt. 1t is but another
vay by which labor is made to contrib
tie to capital. "a
Sd. The law is unequal in its appli-
alton and therefore unjust. Under the
'ederal law, as originally enacted, hO-
els were compelled to procure a license,
ut this license was graded "a word at
'hich the Signal seems to take offense)
ccording to the rental value of the
roperty appropriated to hotel purposes.
his was just-rental value being meas
red by the business done, the hotel
eeper paid in proportion to his busi-
ess, and the village inn keeper was
ot compelled to pay the same sum ex-
cted from the proprietor of city or
ashionable resort hotel palace. The
cott law recognizes no such difference,
ut taxes the little cross-road, house of
efreshment of rental value of perhaps
100, the same amount as the brilliant
ity saloon of a rental value of thous-
nds and daily receipts Of hundreds.
These are among our reasons for say
lg that the Scott law is imperfect"
What are Foraker's reasons? Will the
igndl tell us?