The Ocala banner. (Ocala, Marion County, Fla.) 1883-194?, 1891-05-22
Applied Scicnce----That Same old
Tune

The New York Assembly has killed the Lame
Dlli taxing personal property at its face yAlne
without exception for debts charged AGAINST II
i,er oiI was strongly antagonzed by business
interests as involving double taxation ana likely
10 result III driving business out Of the State.
50 says the Baltimore Sun. The
shaliowness, the falsity, the downright
Stiffness Of the plea that, including
every species of property in the taxable
basis tends to drive business out of the
State" might be expected to drive that
stale chestnut ont of use In the frs,
place the general propo sition that all
property should bear its Just share Of
taxation, stands impregnable against
every assault OF sophistry and false
dealing with the people. 1t is property
and not debts which the State must
tax. The Slate has nothing at all what
ever to do with the private debts of a
citizen. There are large numbers of
men holding immense properties, real
and personal, who if their debts were
paid would not have one dollar left.
Shall the immense properties held by
these people, often throughout life. be
exempt from taxation No man can be
found foolish enough to maintain such
proposition unless he be crazy man or
an imbecile. If A buys a horse of B
and gives his note for the value, who
ought to pay the tax on the horse, A.
who has possession and use of him and
for whose debts he is liable, or B, who
has neither possession nor use of the
animal and for whose debts it cannot be
made liable? A question cannot arise
as to who should be liable for the tax
on the horse. A question can not arise
as to the right of the State, or as to its
duty, TO tax the horse. 1t would be
puerile and silly to the last degree for A
to set up the claim that L. should pay
the tax on his property because he owed
B an unpaid debt. Shall the State then
forego the tax on the horse until A pays
his debt to B? NQnonsense is more ri
diculous. What has the State to do
with AS debt? 1t is his own affair.
But what about the note? IF the State
taxes the note, is that a double tax on
the horse Is the note property
If anybody steals it he will have that
question definitely if not satisfactorily
answered IF B. does not consider it
property Of equal value with the horse,
& is fool, and if A does not so consider
it, A is knave. Is it possible that any
question can arise as to whether the
State should tax The note and the horse,
both Of them? Each of them are Of
idenlic ! value, and each should pay the
same tax to the State as every other
species of property of the same value
pays. There can be no possible diff
Guilty about the matter. If upon any
pretext or preiense the State exempts
any species of property from taxation,
it necessarily requires that tax at the
hands of other sorts Of property. And
this is 10 do violence to every principle
of equity. It amounts to a false assess
ment, which is the meanest and the
wickedest form of tyranny and dis
honesty, 1t is the grossest of all posi-
bic abuses of power.
If TO tax personal property without
dedueIing debts be "double taxation"
how is not also doubt, taxation TO tax
real estate without deducting debts
against such real estate ? A man Of
sense ought to be ashamed to address
such stuff to an intelligent public. Now
here in the State of Maryland the
farmer pays tax on his real estate, but
he does not deduct the mortgage. He
pays tax on every animal, old and
young; every implement and every tool
he uses in cultiyating his land; every
betterment and improvement he erects /;
every tree he plants; every ditch he
opens. If now he takes his produce to
sell from his own wagon, drawn by his
own team, he is taxed for the privilege
OF selling. IF he seeks the middleman
to sell for him, the railroads and the
middlemen combine to fleece him. Is
this double taxation? In any wise the
farmer is between the devil and the
deep sea. If the proposition is 70 tax
the business mans" personally and
not deduct its debts, that's double
taxation" But if the proposition is that
IFS double taxation" to tax farmers
personally and not deduct his debts,
that's a wild vagary of the Farmers
Alliance. We want you business
men, to take notice that farming is
+" business" too; don't You understand
Hereafter business men" must make
up their minds to pay their taxes, or if
they prefer to take their business out of