New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-06-21
STANDING BY THE POLL-TAX.

The defeat by all enormous majonty Ol the
Constitutional Amendment In Pennsylvania
abolishiug the pUl-tax is q surprise. il had
been generally expected that the tax would be
wiped out, especially as it was known 10 10
productive of much petty corruption III the
large cities. The feeling " these localities III
favor Of the amendment Is seen to have been
overwhelming In Philadclphis alone the ma
jorty for it aud against the TAX was " 90
Yet in the rural counties, where the abuses oil
the tax have not been 70 apparent, the voting
was 50 strongly for the tax that the amendment
vas rejected by almost a. large a msjonty IA
that against the Prohibition amendment inc
majority in favor Of retaining the tax Is ABOUT
100000 This result is the more surprising,
inasmuch a. the poll-taN II now considered
antiquated, and even in states where 1t is sui
pumnaly in force, is often not properly col
lected. A report made 70 the Ncw-l ork Legs
atup in 1860 showed that twCnty-sevcn states
and Territories employed IT, The number has
now considerably diminished. though Penn
sylvania has imposed it since that day. II Is
found now mostly III the New-EngIand aud
southern States. In Massachusetts,. a. IN Penn
sylyania the payment is made prerequisite %
the exercise Of the right VI suffrage. Ia the
former State, as in Pennsy lyanla its repeal has
long been agitated but thus far the move
meut has not been successful. The oyerwhclm.
ing defeat of repeal in Pennsylvania will be
likely TO have the same diScUurIging effect
unnn similar efforts in other states tho
crushing verdict against Prohibition upon like
movements elsewhere.
Dating from the most ancient times, in which
il was badge VI inieIionty, as when II Nas
paid by slaves and capuveS the polI-tAN has
ALWAYS been source II complaint on the ground
Of its inequality. The poor man pays AZ mr h
~ the rich Long before the iusurre'tlOn u
Wa, Tyler, which was due To a poll-tax, that
method Of deriving revenue was odious to the
people. In the early colonial days, when all
the business Of Government wa, done upon a
primitive scale, this tax was III some Ot The
| colonie, the only direct tax for long period,
and this method bore ~ heavily upon the pO"r
that, in Maryland, for example, the people IN
l717 declared it Rrev"uS aud oppressive.
| Ohio aud Maryland prUhIbi, such taxes ia their
constitutions. and Rhode Island has done the
| same by statute. In those States where the
| tax now survives, eAcep, where payment Is re
| Uuired in order to obtain the right TO vote, the
amount is nominal, and no Systematic effort -
made " collect IT, In some Of the states, II IL
said, not more than halt Of the mae citl-
zens pay it. Those who have other taxes ia
pay find this added TO the list, but those who
are not taxpayers are apt not TO be reached.
The sentiment in favor Of the tax in Ma>Sa-
chusetts aud Pennsylvania seems to result from
a feeling that, by compelling every citizen 10
contribute to the cost Of government, il gives
him u direct interest in it's administration. II
is certainly open to question, however, whcth"'
this gain is compensation for the bribery "a
which the tax gives rise. In those States III
which citizens cannot vote who have not paid
their poll tax 1t Is the custom for the politician:
Of both parties To pay the tax Of thousands who
would either not vote at all or who sellre this
contemplate brbe for their votes. This Is q
demoralizing practice. The small return the
tax brings to The treasury certainly does not
compensate for this evil, aud the political
benefit to be derived by calling upon every citi-
zen for direct contribution Of few cent?
every year would seem to be vague