The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1893-10-29
SUNDAY. OCTOBER 20. 1898.
SIXTEEN PAGES.
An INCOME TAX.

we argued yesterday Tor tax on sugar
aud thereby laid ourselves open TO th'
denegogue's cry that The Times is IN,
enemy Of the poor man. But The Times is
the enemy Of no man. The Times aims
at securing equal and exact justice 20
all. and. In pursuing that end. 1t has in
dependence enough to urge the imposi-
tion on poor men Of the burdens which
they should equitably bear. with the same
earnestness that IL demands the imposi-
ton on rich men Of the burdens which
they should bear a natural corollary
therefore. from our article Of yesterday,
is a consideration Of the proposal 70 i'm
pose an income tax for the support OF
the general government.
An income tax is an odous tax because
II puts government spies to prying into
The private affairs Of the citizen. Never,
theless, The Times is in favor Of inn
posing IT.
A recent issue Of the New ork Journal
of Commerce has the following editorial
on this subject:
The frequent predictions Of an income
tax seem TO come mostly from some
Southern and Southwestern coneressmen.
who are given TO charging on the poverty
OF thelr constituents. and who have an
IDEA that an income tax would squeeze
some purse-proud and obnoxious citizens
o1 the NORTH and East who arc having
700 gooo a time of II at present The
Income tax IS theoretically an extremely
convenient and equitable tax. but unfor-
Aunately II Is so easily eVadad that in
practice In this country IL Yields bur
niue revenue, and falls most inequitablv |
on the Taxpayers. When the internal |
revenue can be increased sixtv-fva mil
lion dollars, with slight increase Of bur |
ueh upon the consumers of whiskey and |
TOBACCO ana probably no increase on the
consumers OF Deer there is no sufficient |
occasion Tor levying an inquisltorial in
come tax. and especially a graduated in
come TAX designed ayOwedly TO punisb
the crime Of being wealthy.
Now, The Times is a Southern io,,rn,1
ana II favors an income tax and not at
All Tor the reason suggested by the Jour
MAJ OF Commerce either. but for perfect
~ sound ard defensible reasons.
An Income in rich mans pocket is
property and 1t should, therefore, bear its
rateable proportion of the public burdens
just Hs all other property does, unless it
can establish some special claim to ex-
empuon. The claim set up is that. as
a house has been taxed, II is double tax
alton 10 make the owner OF the house nav
another tax upon the rent he receives
from II after that rent is in his pocket
rms Is specious but not sound, and the
courts have always pronounced against
the contention after IL has been fully and
fairly argued out before them. And right
~ on the following principle:
Taxation and protection are reciprocal
The law protects property and it is no
more than fair, therefore. that the proper
ty protected should contribute to pay the
'ost OF maintaining the law. The most
usual case In which the claim is made {
nat this double taxation. is the case
u bond secured by a mortgage on ,
house. II is said that as the house navs
uh taxes it is wrong to make the bond
$50 pay But the courts have always .,
iven this answer TO the claim. They Ca, .
ne house belongs 20 one man. the bond =
another The law protects the hopse
nj the house should, therefore nav for y
: The bond is the evidence OF the debt :,
ue TO the other one and is, therefore Of :,
ne utmost importance TO him The law =,
rotects the bank vault in which the
wner OF the bond locks II up and il is :
'erefore, no more than fair that the :,
ond should aid in paying the expense the :,
w Is al IN affording protection 10 II
Is Enforcement Of the principle that -.
Sauen and protection are recipro ,aI =,
al that is all there is in it, =,
NOW II is true that the law protects a.
e mouse OF bond owned by a capitalist -.
10 mat ne pays for this protection. But 80
e law also protects the dollars ln his -,
'chet or In bank 10 his credit that he =
. received as rent for the house or IN 50,
rest on the bond. II is no more than A.,
IT. Then. on the principle stated above 700
az he should pay for the protection ~,
nch the law gives 10 his dollars AZ. ar
he has received them as rent There Oh
no double taxation. therefore. In AN IN ~,
me tax. An income is as much liable IN
taxation on all principles OF fairness y
equity as any other property though. me
we have said. II Is an odious tax ire
Och should never be imposed II Il can ,sss
reasonably avoided. AS,