The Evening critic., 1884-01-11
MORE PEOPLE HEARD FROM
On the Subject of the New License
Tax Bill. So

On the Subject OF the Now License
Tax bill.
Mir. Christman, restaurant-keeper, corner OF
Eighth and l. streets southeast, was we'll sat
isfed with the bill. He thought that the ono
privilege extended saloon-k keepers OF not being
compelled to bring list OF slgners every time
n license was asked for, unless complaint had
been made, was worth 500 In Itself.
n. u. Shields,
grocer and liquor dealer, corner OF Eighth
bore pretty hard on small dealers. cor
course" said he, "tho large dealers want the
personal tax abolished, but that was much
easier for the small dealers than this new IL
cense,"
Il. M. Botelcr,
undertaken, No. 1856 Eighth street southeast:
81 think there should be no tax on an under.
takers wagon any moro than on his hearse,
but otherwise am we'll satisfied with the bill.
/ an glad to have the personal tax system
done away with. IL Is an iniqultous system
and one which shifted the burden OF taxation
on the shoulders OF the more honest men. 1t
is imperfectly carried out. tits great incon.
yenience and Is not executed according TO law
by tho Government officers themselves. I
will not BIO affected myself much by the bill.
will have ~ pay about tho same tax do now,
but should rejoice to SEQ the system done
away WITH"
Mr.. Joseph w. Arnold,
grocer, No. 535 Eighth street southeast spoke
freely In condemnation OF the bill. ut is oil
In the interest OF tho rich houses. It's the
with tho smaller dealers that they all have
that opinion. Many say that II the bill passes
they viii not get their goods from tho whole
eale dealers here, but will go TO Baltimore.
The bill is oppressive on the smaller places,
but relieves the richer ones OF some OF their
present burdens"
Mr.. II. i. Burtt,
etatIoner, No. 800 Seventh street, thought
the bill had the same tendency as all leglsla-
tion for the past twenty-five years-it would
make the poor poorer. Its result, he be-
lieyed, would be to crush out many small
dealers. IL was plainly IN the interests OF the
larger shops. Personally no would be az
feeted very little, but no regretted tho ten
dency OF the bill.
MIR. y. I. Mitchell,
druggist, Seventh street southwest, had not
given the matter mwh attention. The pres
emit tax on druggists he thought too oppressive.
They had to pay personal tux and take out a
license, too, which he thought too much
MR.. George w. Bauer.
restaurant and saloon.keeper, corner OF
Seventh and NJ streets southwest, said that
he thought the bill was a step In favor OF
liquor dealers could better afford to pay $500
for license than the retailers could $3.50.
He knew there were lots OF retailers who
couldn't AFFORD TO pay the $3.50 license.
Mr. John ID. Mangum,
grocer and liquor dealer, corner OF Seventh
and II streets southwest, said he thought the
bill extended moro privileges to the rich than
to the poor. He thought the bill was too
i
were many retailers OF liquor who could
barely a1ord to pay the 500 tax now levied.
| II 1t should be increased to $3.50, they couldn't
| pay 1t and would sell without a license. Tue
| District would lose-not gain. Tho Increase
| would induce great dishonesty. He believed
the poor should BIO favored, rather than tho
| rich.
| MIR. Harry Bowers,
| proprietor OF tho st. Marc Hotel: "rhe pro.
| posed bill Is so much different and such an
| Improvement over the old law that 1 am in
| favor OF 1t. The abolition OF the personal tax
| strikes me as the best thing In the bill. The
| liquor license Is not too high"
Mr.. Frank Howe:
| "yory good bill. Hope 1t will be adopted"
Mr.. Charles Thompson.
attorney; cit should BIO adopted by Congress-
| without hesitation"
w. y. jerks:
"Read tho proposed bill thorou hly. Moth
| ing In IL that object to-"
y. w. wade:
~ hope, the bill will pass both Houses of
| Congress-"
What Mr. vi. I. Weller Says.
| CRITIC reporter called upon Mr.. Weller
| OF the firm OF Weller Il Repetti, cigar aud
| tobacco manufacturers. Mr.. Weller said whils
| tlon TO levy tax upon every person IN Dusl-
ness was a bad one. "rhere are,"
| no said, "several thousand stores kept
| by poor people, whose stock In trade
| while others OF this class have only tribe
| over that amount In stock. There poor peo-
| pie Will ind 10 hard indeed 70 meet tho re-
| qulred tax-$1O. II that clause relating TO
these folks, is eradicated, the bill ought to
| paes. II not, hoped IL is defeated
| number of other gentlemen, whom THE
| CRITIC reporter saw, agree entirely with Mr..
| Weller on the feature OF the Dill.