The Louisiana Democrat., 1891-10-07
the consequent difficulty OF obtaining
it, whether in the form of a duty to the

the consequent difficulty of obtaining
it, whether in the form of a duty to the
government or a profit by the make, or
seller. The higher the duty demanded
by the government, the more capital
will be required to prepare the article
for the purchaser and as the govern
ment dutyshas diminished the sale, a
larger profE6n smalfers sale will be
required tossremunerate the capitalist
for investment. hence the consumer has
to pay assort of treble .tax;the govern
ment ia the extra capital tax and the
tax consegpent on diminished sale. Ap-
ply this rule to any taxed srticle you
choose cloths, COAL .teh coffee, lace,
silks, knives, etc, etc. Now The dimin-
ished use throws the workman sout of
eniployments soyerstocks theaabor mar
ket LOVERS swages, causes nperism
and sas vices conseq queat M hdpience,
or theswant of hssltiIy exsf ftement We
must do sonnet ail bad on then
let us give every encoura geiasnt 10 do
ing good. sssssaA -
Let,us now consider .tbs o6 sequence
of laying all the tsxes On land. The
landholder would then have SO much
less interest in keeping the land hy the
extra amount of.taxes levied on it. To
make it equally profitable, its-hnust be
ietter cultivated andSi they can not
or will not do ifthemse1ses2 it will be
their interest to ssll il Or hire the. Gull
tivation to be done. This will give em-
ploynient and food, insteadof difHinishL
ing them, as in the taxing of personal
property. look at the dreadful condi-,
ton of France at the present moment.
Thousands of her heroic sons digging
up -stonss-in-ens. part-ef-t the streets. and
removing them to another. Just to keep
the people from anarchy! Will this
give permanent and profitable employ
menta to the unemployed2 Is this the
way to tighten the burden of taxation
and make it easy for the taxpayer?
Who can foresee the poverty, the bank
ruptcy, the misery, the crime, that must
follow the continuance of such course?
The workmen now look to government
for employment and wages. How can
the wages be continued without the
land being made productive? How can
the land be made productive without
the requisite labor? Then why not
make it the interest of 1andholders to
have the land cultivated by laying all
the taxesa on the land, and thus throw
the speculation in personal property?
What care we how much personal prop
erty any one has, if we have the euse Of
the land to make the same for our
selves? If the legitimate tlaAdholders
are wise, they will see to this before
the workmen. assert their claim to the
soil, and enforce it by arms,
Ought taxes TO be raised in such
way as to encourage industry? Now,
if two persons own equal quantities Of
land say eighty acres each, one puts
thousand dollars worth of improve
ment on his land,- the. other one hum
dred dollars. the Improvements are
taxed according to their value; conse- 4
quently the one who has made . thou-
sand dollars improvement has ten times
the taxes to pay for industry that the
other has to pay for his Incidence. Does
not the Industrious man pay off the idle
mans taxes? AS they each occupy an,
equally valuable portion of land, why
should they not contribute equally for
its use, to odefray the necessary expenses
Of government? t.5.s at. isetaa
Let us look at the economy. One
valuation. less difficult than va1uing
what personal property you can find,
would suffice. No one, would be inter
ested in denying what belonged to him.
We have now several valuations for
different taxes; think three, with as
many different sets Of officers to pay,
which is inquisitorial and vexatious.
Now, as to the moral results Theget-
ting rid, of paying tax by smuggling
or false swearing seems almost consid.
cred smart which lessons respect fol
all law and honesty Three of our prin.
cipal merchants swore off their per-
sonal tax last year, others have to pay
their tax, which encourages them to dc
the same, till the habits of all become
more corrupt One OF the three mer-
chants got up a petition this year to al
low the merchants to swear off what
goods they owed for, SO that while the
owner of house must pay his tax,
though he owes the full amount of it,
the merchant may evade the tax by
swearing he owes for his goods.
Please, as soon as convenient, obligo
us with your views on this subject
Right or wrong, ! am anxious to know
it.-Edwin Burgess,