Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1883-06-21

intention of the General Assembly tC
assert its authority under this provision
The principal of regulating certain
emplOymentS by taxation is not a new
feature in law. 1t has been applied al
times to the extent of prohibition. A
tax of ten per centum, for example, or
! the circulating notes of individual and
State banks, provided for by the United
| states statutes. is the only protection
the people have against the wildcat sys-
| tenn of banking, but it works as effectu-
al prohibition as could direct statute
Sometimes the imposition of tax has
no reference to the object of raising rev.
enue, but seeks rather the regulation of
relative rights, privileges and duties be-
tween individual, the conservation OF
good order in society, the encouragement
of industry, and the encouragement of
emplOyments prejudicial to the interest
of the people. The power to levy taxes
for these purposes exists independent of
the constitution. 1t is inherent in eve
ry sovereignty. and is usually denomi-
mated the police power of the State. Ia
ken in connection with the specific pow
er given to the General Assembly in the
above section of the constitution, it is
almost illimitable in its control over the
| liquor traffic.
Speaking on this subject, Judge Thur
man, in Miller v. State, Ohio ST., 4S6,
said
''The power of regulation, power to pro-
vide against evils incident t0 traffic, power
to protect community against the frauds or
dangerous practices of trade, is, in a greater
or less degree, vested in every government,
and certainly the people of Ohio are not
wholly without this protection. If to guard
against these evils, some restraint upon the
traffic itself is necessary, it may lawfully be
be imposed, the fact being always borne in
mind, and always acted upon, that the power
is power to regulate, and not tOdestrOy.
To this power, intoxicating liquors are ex-
pressly subjected by the constitutional pro-
vision l have quoted (Section 1S of the Sched>
ule;) )but were that provision stricken out of
the constitution, the power would yet sub
sist."
The authorities do not all agree that
this power to regulate necessarily stops
short of prohibition. Chief Justice Mar
shall, in Mccullough V. Maryland, says
that 'the power to tax involves the pow
er to destroy" However this may be, it
is not material to the present issue.
Perhaps Judge Cooley states the prop
osition most clearly in his admirable
work on taxation, page II, in these
words:
They taxes, may be intended to discourage
trades and occupations which may be useful
and Important when carried on by few per-
sons under stringent regulations, but exceed>
ingly mtschtevous when thrown open to The
general public and engaged in by many per-
10 10 q hno
in some states, and III some localities OF other
states on those who engage in the manufact~
ure or sale of Intoxicating drinks. Two pur>
poses are generally had in view in imposing
such a tax: to limit the business to q few per-
sons In order to more efficient and perfect
regulation, and also to produce a revenue. As
no one wi i pay the tax who does not expect
to be reimbursed the expense from the profits
OF sales, it is obvious chat the heavier the tax
the fewer can afford to pay 1t, and II may be
made SO heavy that no one can afford to pay
1t, and tnen 1t becomes pIohibitOry. A tax
laid for the double purpose of regulation and
revenue must be q founded in both the police
and the taxing power; bCU the grant OF pow
Ell to TAX would not authorize the imposition
of a burden in Us nature and purpose prohlb-
itofy."
at often happens in certain avoca
tions, as the retailing of liquors. etc"
says Burroughs in his treatise on the
law of taxation, that the power TO tax
is used in aid of the police power, either
by devoting the fund to the payment of
the police force, or by making the tax
so high as to be in its nature prohibito-
ry"
Quotations without limit, from the
opinions of eminent jurists, might be
made in support of the proposition, th at
State Legislatures have power to impose
taxes as a means Of regulating the traf-
fic in intoxicating liquors. The author
tiles are all one way. That this power
is also included in the specific grant in
Section IS of the Schedule, to provide
against the evils resulting from the traf-
6c, hardly admits of doubt.
In Ohio the right is therefore dou-
bly, secured, its exercise being wisely
left discretionary with the General AS
sembly, limited only by other provisions
of the constitution. Sound policy re-
quires that the node and manner of
imposing taxes should be as little re
stricted as possible. The exigenciss of
the government cannot be anticipated,
and the fact that in the imposition of
taxes the government acts upon its con-
stituents, is generally a sufficient guar
anty against unjust or oppressive bur-
dens.
1t is not for courts to question the ex-
ercise of discretionary power; the Gen
eral Assembly, in matters of this kind,
answers alone to its constituents. The
wisdom of the different provisions of
statute, and the prOpriety of their enact
ment are not subjects of review. Many
of the objects of the present law are ap-
parent on its face, and appear to be such
as was contemplated in the grant of
power to the General Assembly in sec
tiOn IS of the Schedule.
Its enforcement will unqueStionably
discourage the traffic and reduce the num-
Der of places where intoxicating liquors
are sold; consequently the amount of
and its cOncomitant evils
will necessarily be crrtailed to some eX-
tent What these evils are, it is not need |
full to inquire in court of law consider
ing the cOnstitutionality of an act of the |
General Assembly; they are known, how
ever, and realized in sorrow by almost ev-
cry family in the land. More financial |
will be required of those |
engaged in the traffic; hence, greater care |
will be exercised not to violate the other |
laws on our statute books, providing |
against the evils of the traffic, resulting |
no doubt in corresponding decrease in
the disorders incident to the business. 1t |
is not disputed that among those evils is
an increase of pauperism and crime, en-
failing, as they do, heavy financial bur-
dens upon the public A large proportion
of the revenues derived frem taxation is
expended each year in caring for the un-
and in prosecuting the vicious,
rs a direct result of the traffic This evil,
if the law should be sustained, will be
mitigated at least to the extent that the
taxes collected under it may be distribu-
ted among the poor, the police, and the
general revenue funds of the municipali-
ty or county where the traffic is carried
on. But why undertake to enumerate
the evils which flow from the traffic in
liquors? 1t is self-evident
that any law which tends to
lessen the amount of dram-drinking, will