The Saline County journal. [volume] (Salina, Kan.) 1871-1893, 1891-03-12
rHr DiHEcr rAx Acr.

A good deal Of misapprehension
seems to exist as to the nature Of
the direct tsx act Of 1881. out Of which
grew the bill which has ct last passed
Congress and become . law. Such
demsgogical politicians - Springer,
OF Springfield, would have the peo-
pie believe that Il was q piece Of
Prodigality, when as Q matter Of
fact IL was simple and even-handed
Justice. IL does indeed carry with
IL large appropriation, but the sew
eral States are the bsnefieIaries.
The actual appropriation involved
Is SIS 22T ,6s2. Besides this there IL
Q remission or cancellation Of q bal
ance due from thirteen States Of
%, 5s2 ,4Ol. This latter IL q mere
matter Of bookkeeping. The sctual
refund interest because Il goes to
every State In the Union except Ida
no, Wyoming, and Montana, and
every Territory exceptAriZona Even
the District Of Columbia IL interest
ed to the extent Of nearly $4,000.
Illinois will receive 1874 ,5Gs; New
York, t2,2lS, $50; Pennsylvania, ST.
S54, III; Ohio, q, SS2, O25. Indiana il
next to Illinois, tT69, IA, and Mass
achusetts next to Indiana, STOO, s94.
Wisconsin will receive $40, 535; lows
1884 "a; Missouri, t646, s5s Virginia,
si42, i0S, aud Tennessee, sSa2, OOI.
These details give an idea Of the
breadth Of interest the act involves.
IL was In 1861 when the General
Government was in sore need OF
money, and before the financial
system which enabled the country
to meet the requirements Of the gov
ernment had been devised, that
Congress- provided for an annual
direct tax Of 81, 90. 900 = year. The
special session OF Congress, held In
the summer Of 1861, put such q pro-
vision upon n bill authorizing loans
and increasing duties. An estimate
Of the wealth Of the country was
made, based on the eighth census,
taken the year before, and the quota
ofehch State assigned on the strength
OF IL. Illinois was even then reck-
oned the fourth State of the Union
from property point of view. The
bill amounted to n requlsitIon upon
the several States aud Territories,
and Ia loyal States the payments
were made by the States voluntari-
ly, either out of the surplus In the
State treasures or by direct State
taxation. There was never any at
tempt at enforcement Of the tax after |
the first year. In the states which |
seeded the only way the tax was
collected at all was 10y levy upon the
property Of individual citizens, 80
far as the same could he reached, and,
In some cases, by the seizure Of State
property. a. n matter of fact, the
quota Of the South WAS almost as
fully paid "a the quota Of the North,
although the collection, for the most
part in the South, vas subsequent to
the close Of the war, when the mill
tary power was supreme, aud before
the "era Of reconciliation" set in,
Louisiana, for example, had n quota
OF 1885, SIS, every dollar Of which was
collected, the money being raised by
the sale Of swamp lands and other
lands. The State attempted suisse
to get back the money by a
suit Of law. In 1887 the Court Of
Claims gave a decision In favor of
the State. or course, IL the direct
tax was Illegal, the act being uncon-
stitutional, and such in effect was
the finding OF the court, then the
entire tax collected from every State
should be refunded, and the uneoI-
lected balance conceded. The Sem
ate promptly took that view Of the
II took four years from the
first passage Of the bill by that body
to secure the concurrence Of the
House.
1t will thus be seen THAT virtually
Ibis refund Is simply the compliance
with the judgment Of the court. No
power on earth could enforce pay
ment Of the judgment II Congress
refused TO make the appropriation,
bu: IL would have been downright
dishonest to have persisted In turn
Ing a deaf ear to the claim allowed
BY the United States Court Of
Claims. The Sprlngers OF the De-
are quite welcome to all
he partisan capital they can make
,ut this matter.-Intcr Ocean.