Democratic messenger., 1893-03-11
SPEECH OF CLAYTON ]. PURN ELL, ESQ
In support OF the SufiicIeHcy of
the Constitution for all As
ScSsnent Purposes.
Delivered March I'd. 1893. at
SutrO Hall. Baltimore, before
the Tax Conventions.

MR. PRrsIpENT:- Before accepting
the invitation of Governor Brown to
attend this Convention as a delegate
at large, | had notice that my select
ion, together with other gentlemen,
was made for the purpose of having
discussed the constitutional difficult
ties surrounding the taxation question.
Ny first inclination was to escape the
work and responsibility involved, by
declining the honor, but when |
reflected that the Governor was sin
cerely and earnestly engaged in an
effort to have more light thrown ON a
much vexed subject of State policy, |
could reach no other conclusion than
that rs a citizen, it was my duty to
contribute, however feebly, to the
work of his plan.
In view of the fact that the tax
question, for the discussion of which
we have been called together, is not a
new question, but has engaged the
attention of the people of this State
to greater or less extent for some
years past. and indeed has become so
prominent that political parties in
their platforms have been constrained
to make it the subject of resolution,
and in view of the more recent aoita-
tion resulting from the failure of the
assessment bill passed by the last Leg
islature to become law, accompanied
as it has been by public criticisms
verging upon personal conti o 'ersies. |
feel that | wish to express myself in
measured and guarded terms.
TIE TRUE ECONOMIC PRINCIPLE.
In the fair discussion of most public
questions, it becomes necessary first
To ascertain the true Economic prin-
ciple," which uudcrlies the subject
and upon which as a common ground
all persons may stand. 1t is quite true.
however, that disputes often arise as
to what this principle is, some holding
that it is one thing, others another. and
others still who cannot be made to
recognize it at all. No search light is
needed to find the common ground in
this debate 1t need not be looked for
in treatise on political economy, in
books advancing new theories of taxa
tion, in the speculations of men who
have by study of kindred subjects
become identified with certain indie
pendent ideas, but it will of necessity,
be recognized by all as limited and
defined by the 18th Article of the Bill
Of Rights adopted by the Constitutions
al Convention of lS61 and So long as
that Constitution stands higher than
the legislative, the executive, the
judicial powers of the State, who will
say that an assessment law may be
enacted, which fails to meet the re-
quirement that the tax to be raised
must be laid equally upon all citizens
of the State according to their worth
in real and personal property" 1t is
not left to us to speculate, To theorize,
to mature new ideas upon this point,
for the highest authority of the State
has as far back as century ago put
this at rest by saying That paupers
ought not to be assessed for the sup.
port of government, but that every
person in the State, or person holding
property therein ought to contribute
his proportion of public taxes for the
support of the government according
to his actual worth in real or personal
property"
AN OBLIGATION.
This principle is as much an Obli-
CATION upon the citizen as the assist
ance he owes in any other way in sus-
tanning the government Of his State
whose benefits and blessings he cnj joys
How barren Of results would be an
argument directed towards showing
that the expenses Of government
should be borIe by the people who
enjoy its advantages. This has always
been so Buck to the time whereof the
memory of man runneth not, thrones
hive been established, republics
founded and people ruled by general
consent that the necessary expenses
Of government should be laid upor
the citizens. True it is, that from the
beginning down to the present, the
Phlrisee dem inds to know SIS it. llw-
ful tn give tribute into Cleslr, OF
not ~
But Mr President. il the lcgisla
ture is bound to heed this constitu
tionll mand tie in framing and passing
tax bill, is it not well to inqu,r,
now, if there exists any doubt con
cerning the construction to be placee
upon this mand ,te .,ngulge is Otter
misleading and Is sometimes so ex
pressed as to leave ground for reason
able doubt as to its meaning. The ait
of courts is often invo sed in constrnin:
the meaning of word, and paragraph
and sentences employed in contracts
wills or other documents prepared b,
most careful lawyers. Have we an,
such difficulty IN ascertaining TIN
purport of the language in the 18th
Article of the Bill Of Rights Is tn
language in any sense ambiguous, o
is the meaning clouded In one of th
public speeches recently mad: befor
the Tax Payers Association in thi
City, the word worth was regarded a
having possibly a two fold meaning
No ROOM FOR DOUBT.
But, sir, it appears to me that ther
is no room for question as to the con
struction of the entire Article, whethc
it be taken as whole or be divide
into parts. Whether it be read throue
the gold-rimmed spectaclcs of th
bond holder or by the farmers naked ey
dimmed only by the dust Of the field
Its meaning is the same, that except
| Al. e sl.s. N..N