Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-05-25
PAYING OCCUPATION TAX.

Some Beaver County Farmers Make Kick
Against 1t and Win the Case-Some
Queer Features of the Old Law-At-
tempting to Tax Women.
If farmers generally get the strike notion
into their heads Pennsylvania will have its
hands full, truly. Some of those in Hope
well township, Beaver county, have struck
against paying occupation tax, and j. R.
Martin, the master in the case, has decided
the tax to be illegal, and recommends de-
cree in favor Of the objectors 1t is ex-
pected that exceptions will be filed to the
report, and that it will come before Judge
Wickham in this shape, but the general
opinion among those conversant with the
matter is that the kickers will win, as they
say there is no law authorizing the levy.
This is the view taken by Commissioner
Mercer and Clerk Siebert, gained by con-
ference with the County Commissioners of
the State in their annual conventions. The
theory of the law seems to be that farmers
are of necessity freeholders, and must pay,
in the nature Of things, either a county or
State tax on property, which entities them
to vote, but that in the cities many people,
who earn considerable money, would not be
obliged to do so were it not assessed on their
occupation. But this idea does not hold
good in all cases.
One Way to Escape a Tax.
The number of farmers in this State who
own neither taxable personal property nor
real estate is considerable. For instance, a
tenant farmer might own large number of
animals, such as horses or cows, under four
years old, and these are not taxable, and if
he did not care particularly for vote he
could escape payment of tax.
Though the amount involved in this
county is not large, yet it makes an item.
In this county the occupation of a farmer is
valued at 500 and the tax thereon is 80
probably not much over 81 1000, if that. In
some counties farmers occupation is
valued as low as $50. 1t looks like small
matter over which to trouble, but the differ
ence in the State might amount to $50 900
or SIS, 900 year.
The method of levying occupation tax is
so crude as to suggest that nominal sum
collected from all without regard to
value of occupation would be fairer
and yield better results. Some years ago
the theory followed was to assess the tax on
a mans supposed income as nearly as it
could be reached approximately. Under
were taxed on about all they could make,
while others making $40 or $50 day paid
but little more, sometimes less. A case in
point was that of two men, one clerk and
the other an iron roller. The former got
s, 200 year salary, while the roller made
between $4,000 and $4,000. The clerk was
assessed at 81 900 and the roller at $500
year.
Hundreds of Similar Cases.
By looking over the books in the County
Commissioners Office for the period be-
tween 1873 and 1883, or 1885, hundreds of
such cases can be found. Now occupations
are rated at 500, $500 and $500, and under
authority of law, as laid down to the Com
missioners, but some of the S100 men make
more money than the average of those rated
at $500, while women pay not at all, though
some of them get large salaries They do
not get vote, however, which makes some
difference. Some attempts have been made
to collect taxes from femme sole traders and
some saloon ''keeperesses, but after sew
eral futile efforts the collectors gave up,
being afraid of scalding water.