The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1883-11-29
THE SURPLUSRE REVENUE
DISTRIBUTION AMONG THE STATES:
III. View, of the noa. James @. Blaine on the
NsAsurs-Hs is Opposed to the scheme, Lut
Suggests an Admirable Sub,,Itute-yAl.
ulbls Opinions on the Halter.

PHILADELPHIA, Pa, November 2S.-The
Philadelphia Pres tomorrow will contain
letter from James G. Blaine to Charles
Emory Smith. editor Of The Press, stating
Blaine's objections to the distribution oi
the surplus revenue Of the Federal govern
ment among the States and proposing as a
substitute II the national government no
longer needs the tax on spirits that the
entire amount should be paid to the
States. Three fatal objections, in Blaine's
opinion, make the Pennsylvania proposi.
tios to distribute the Federal surplus un-
wise.
First, the utter uncertainty OF the size Of
tho redundant revenue. Itmay be a mil
lion or one hundred millions, and unless
steady no State tax could be remitted on
account Of the receipt Of this aid, while the
sporadic Federal contributions to the
States would be wasted as was the last dis-
tribution OF the Federal surplus.
Second, The division OF the surplus
would impose on the Senators and Repre-
sentatives divided duty. For the cake Of
their States they would wish the surplus to
be as large as possible, which would pre-
sent constant temptation TO withhold ap.
propriations for objects really OF Ma.
tional character.
Third, The assumption Of continuingthe
reducing OF the National revenue Is oppos.
ed TO all sound views Of administration,
because It is sure to yield 70 extravaganza,
corruption and all manner OF schemes for
getting rid Of money.
The time is rapidly approaching,
however, when tho National revenue,
yielding under the present system
q taxation Of 100000. 600 beyond the
the amount required for the government
expenses, must be reduced. A strong
movement is already on foot for the repeal
OF the entire system OF internal revenue,
which receives the suppo tol protectionists
like Judge Kelley and Tree traders like
Cox, Of New York. This conjunction Of
opposing views in support Of the abolition
OF the came tax gives rare opportunity 10
relieve taxation in the States Of all our
taxes. State taxation is most op.
pr. asive. 1t Is direct. 1t falls
upon property with crushing force.
In lew communities II is less than one
per cent and in most 1t is over two per cent.
Why, therefore, should not the States be
permitted to have u tax on spirits for their
own benefit. tthe National Government
does not need 1t, can 1t be wise to continue
q direct tax on property and at the same
time command hurifui luxury like spirits
to go free, o luxury whose taxation op.
presses no one? Excise is open In
theory to both Stale and National
use In taxation, but in practice
the National authority alore can levy an
excise tax on whisky. NJ Slate can guard
Its borders against whisky from other
States, or make an economical collection OF
such tax within Its own revenue. The
Federal machinery for the collection Of
this revenus is in full operation and q bill
Of ten lines could direct the Secretary ot
the Treasury 10 pay the 7Whcle at less ex-
penae In collection to the States and terri.
tories in proportion to their .popnla.
ton, anda continue It permanent.
Iy as o part of their regular annual
revenue. ~ =. ia, .e::-c-ra
Such plan would give Q revenue
from specific tax wholly TO the
States and 'Sonld not depend upon q
chance surplus or accidental remainder in
the national treasury. 1t would make o
tax on Bpirituous and malt liquors a per-
manent resourse to all States, enabling
them thereby to definitely readjust and re.
duce their own taxation. E.ch State
could most wisely use It's share according TO
its own necessities. The total return OF the
tax on epirituons and malt liquors last
year was over $4,000, 900, an amount
which would tend to increase rather than
diminish as each State saw that the sup
preston Of illicit distilleries was to It's ad.
vantage. With this reyenuesta.e taxation
could be remitted, State debts paid; or, II
the aid were divided among the
cities and counties their expen-
Ees woald be proportionately di.
minished.
In table annexed 10 the letter
Blaine shows the share Of the large
States on basis OF population TO be S. $685.
900 Tor New York; s., ,49S, 900 for Pennsyl.
vanis; S., ,2S5 coo Tor Illinois, and S. 500, 600
Tor OHIO, the smaller States receiving in
proportion.