Sacramento daily record-union., 1888-12-14
DAILY RECORD-UNION
FRIDAY. DECEMBER IL, 1883
THE DIRECT TAX BILL AGAIN.

The "direct tax" bill has at last gone TO
the President for approval. The Demo-
cratic party enjoys the unenviable distinc-
tion of having cast all the negative votes
against the measure. The amount pay
able under the bill to California is $751;
53S 81. The direct tax levied upon all
the States by the Federal Government
under the Act of. 1861 was S20,000,000.
1t was provided that if the tax was paid
prior TO June 80, 1862, OF September so,
1862, there should be allowed rebate of
15 per cent. in the first instance, and 10
per cent. if the latter date was availed Of
After that no rebate was to be allowed.
In 1884, Notwithstanding the limitations
provided and that California did not re-
spond within time, the Government re-
mitted to this State in July, our full
quota of the Is per cent. amounting to
S3S,180 so. The'demand upon California
under the direct tax levy was tle sum
first named, S254,53 We paid of this
S69,S39 81 in October, 1862, and in Feb
ruary, 1868, $1S3,6O6 10, leaving due
S7,093 26. On this delinquency the Gov
ernment in January, 1868, credited Cal
ifornia with 1896 Y on account of the
Modoc Indian war claims, leaving still
due S6,497 Sd This, deducted from the
$9S, 1S0 so, left due to California $31,
$50 26 on the rebate, which was paid as
already stated. This allowance was
granted to California Notwithstanding she
had forfeited her claim to it, because she
assumed the costs and charges Of collecting
the tax, which was direct lien upon the
property of the people.
There is curious bit of history con-
nected with this rebate worth recalling
We collected of our people S7o,992 Sc of
the direct tax in gold prior to the last
date of limitation but cur State Treasurer
converted the gold into greenbacks and
rendered it to the United States Sub
Treasurer who refused to accept it in cur
rency, and the contention that followed
carried us past the last date of limita-
ton. Our Treasurer claimed 10
per cent. rebate because the collection
vas made before expiration of the limita-
ton, deducted it and finally paid over to
the United States $685. ,S39 81, and We thus
became indebted to the United States
S7,093 26, because the Federal Government
daolina 70 raooor,,;ya o,,r e,-c+oro of Ill
keeping, holding that the money should
have been actually paid over in the
character as collected prior to the expira-
ton of the limitation under which we
would be entitled to.. 10 per cent. off.
Some of the States took the ground that
the levy of the tax was unconstitutional
and in fact of the $2OOOO,OO0 demanded,
but S17,359,6S5 ever was collected
Through great deal of attempted legisla-
tion and much wrestling with the Treasury
Department Of the Federal Government.
California finally secure a settlement of her
account, and balance was struck 1t is
intimated, now that the bill of allowance
has passed both houses, that the President
will veto it. 1t is not clear what ground
he will assume for the action In equity
the money should be refunded, and if it is
not done by reason of the Presidents veto,
the Federal Government will be guilty OF
an act of injustice towards the States that
will, in case it ever needs to make another
call, render it very difficult task.