Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1893-01-19

HIS Masferly Exposition Of tie Qnes-
fioaof 7dzatioa-TRe Listing
System w Ofher STATES
Esery La.c haqmisifo-
Ttai-Jasfics, Not
s 4Erpedienel, De-
: a. manded.
Baltimore Herald, Jan, II.

baltimore Herald, Jan, 4 I. - -
Hon. james sEllegood. of Sails
bury, a member of the ways and
means committee of the last Legis-
lature and one of the leading menu
bers of the Eastern Shore bar, de-
liyered q carefully-prepared address
last night before the Taxpayers
Association on 1.-The Hayes Bill"
and why Governor Brown should
have signed it.
Mr.. Ellegood said that it is graf
flying thas there is a Taxpayers
Association in Baltimore, whose
members are to be congratulated
upon their efforts to disseminate
sentiment in favor of taxpaying in
stead of tax-dodging, and to indoc-
trinate them with the idea that il is
one of the prime duties ofevery good
citizen to contribute according to
his ability to the support of the
government under which he lives.
Taxation, he affirmed, and the
right of taxation-popular notions
to the contrary-together constitute
one of the greatest blessings under
a representative and honestly ad-
ministered government. Taxation
is an attribute of sovereignty
debt which the citizen owes to an
institution which secures him per-
sonal liberty: Criticisms of the
Hayes bill have been destructive
rather than constructive. It is not
claimed that it was ayperfect meas
-are, but it was better than anything
its opponents brougiKrforAsafd, and
was in harmony with the theory
and, principles of taxation as was.
laid down by political economists as
far. back as: Adam Smith;. it con-
formed to our owss constitution and
the xill.cf the people of this State.
Mr:- Eifegood then showed how
unfounded was the 6pinisnsof the
Sunpaper and Epyernor Brown. that.
the Hayes bill was arailroaded''
through the. Honse Of 5naEgates,.
when that body hasi; rejected, after
long discassion, the BeFfet bill be;
cause it did not meet the demattls
which the Hayes .bfi satisfied. .~.Of
the Governors recent complaint,
that the''supplemental biH,' which
scaled the assessment of 'bonds; was
unconstitutional, Mr.. Ellegood said:
s-a Heard tie R0ll-Cali. -. i.
l. lis it not strange that it took
him eight months to.discoyer the
Injustice and unconstitut1opality of
this supplementary bill and-its inn
poEtant relation to the general bill!
Did he not know that it was only a
repeal and re-enactment of Sectlon
3, Of Article 81, while the Hayes
bill repealed and re-enacted Sec,
tions /, 2, 4, 141, 146, and added
l1sundry new sections !? Bldshe not
know that the Hayes bill provided
for the assessment 'of the bonds.
certificates of Indebtedness &c..
named in the supplementary bill:
Did-he not know Section 81, of Ar
ticle 81, directs the Treasurer TO
levy the State taxes on the public
debt of Maryland liable to taxation.
by the same ruleof assessment, ex-
cept that the .yaluation was higher.
and that this has.been the law since
1874. Now if he was sosisfcere and
deemed. bill SO unjust to the
farming interest. why did he not
say so in:fss veto; or ysle tliis and
isigp the.1gher, instead Of calling
dPopis take rolI-caIl
:fupon itsr ad5PfiSb or rejection
Wen. doubtless, ae heafd-tRs roll
call at therecentE Farmers Alliance
meeting"
No Doutls> Taxation.
Mr.. Ellegood then told of the
capitalists who waited on the Gov
ernor to urge bin TO. vetorhef Hayes
bill: Said he,.s =
..The delegation; composed. as
we know, Of some of-the. sAlszs aad
wealthiess citizens'sof Baltimore.