Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1893-01-19
., THpRsDAY JANUARY 10. 1898 NO ea5

/ - ~.-< H@<*t 10y ~ A~ssNs< #&44f&8
solution of this whole question i
BY some change in the organic law
by amending cehstikukioA
Property not taneine il Maryland
should not be taxed in Maryland.
ssMr. CowsiA ON khat OCCASION
said, % syiteA hiehksxesthe in
visible. the metaphysical. - ! call
/ stocks and bonds, Is more than dou-
BILE taxation. 8su oannotget 1t il,
and when you do catcl, 4 zen drive
itaway. Wharsws want j . look
at the visible and tangible proper;:
ty. which this bill does not
He also said that this bill taxed
the brain. the skill, the manageri-
al ehserprise' of the property-own-
er. True, for what Use do you
tax? Certainly not the indolent,
the fool or As tramp. II we do
not tax the resnltiof skill, industry
and enterprise we viii tax nothing,
unless we resort to the ssingle tax
theory of Henry George. This ar
gument carried to its logical results
means this: Tax nothing but the
pure land values. This argument
might be forceful in a convention
deTising q theory of taxation, but
has no place under our constitution
al theory. Hyattsville may solve
this problem for as. As to our sys-
tenn being double taxation, which is
true in some respects, it goes with
out saying that he is too good a
lawyer notz to know that it is not
double taxation in the sense of be-
ing illegal taxation. The decisions.
of the courts are too numerous upon
that point.
A Case in Point.
1.-The merchant who pays upon
the value of his goods aud then for
a license to sell them is in one sense
doubly taxed. The farmer assessed
with farm of $4,000, mortgaged
for s., 900, pays on double what he
is worth, and other instances might
be enumerated, such as the double,
il not treble, taxation un6sr your
ground rent system in Baltimore,
but this is not illegal taxation.
Whether law might not be framed
more equal in this respect is sub
iect for discussion. This meta
physical, invisible property which
he talks of is oftentimes the most
valuable property of a corporation,
for instance, that immaterial thing
which we:csll franchise. Ityields
an 'iifcome,- and can be cold in the
market. HIS created by the State
and is protected by it. IL makes
the owner thereof prosperous and
happy: Then why should it not
l'cohtribute its due proportion of the
expenses of government l heard
recently that the owner of water
franchise in a town of this State
had been offered &c., for one
half OF his right. IL he takes the
money and invests it in house or
farm that will probably pay him
less than the franchise will pay the
owner thereof. he must pay on his
visible property, and the franchise
go free because. it ia a 'metaphysi-
cal' thing.
What Is Property
"There is one leading question
to be kept in view, what is proper
ty? When that: is ascertained, no
matter whether. it ia visible, or in
visible, material or immaterial, the
owner Of it ought to pay taxes -ac-
cording to his worth. I have been
asked if it was fair for a man hold
ing bonds to have to pay large
faction OF his income for taxes.
III reply I asked if it is fair for the
landowner, whose land probably
does not pay as much income as the
bond-holder's property, to be CON-
pelIed to pay as large fraction OF
!. his income? Does it seem just and
equal for the bondholder, who be-
slows no time, labor or skill in the
clipping Of bis coupons, who knows
that his paper is gilt edge and that
.his bread ia sure and his water shall
not fall escape taxation or pay
even less rate, while the farmer,
who is up with the morning and
tolls through the heat, cold and
rain till the Pleiades cope forth,
has to pay full rate on a full value
on all that he has, simply because
you. can see it (? At this point we
A.