The Windham County reformer. (Battleboro, Vt.) 1876-1897, 1894-02-02
The Principle of The Inc ONE Tax.

The Principle OF The Inc ONE Tax.
We give today an UNUSUAL portion Of spaC
for weekly paper to the discussion In cor
gress over the income tax, because 1t Is
comparatively new question with this gent
ration, and there are a good many misspprt
tensions current about 1t. II the impositio
OF the tax proves to be pad policy for th
Democratic party, II will have only itself /
blame, for It fought and denounced the Ia,
IS Oppressive" "inquisitorial," "unconstitu
tionsl," etc., when It was laid in war time
and was chiefly instrumental In arous Ing tn
prejudice which has survived to the present
There has PROFESSIONALLY been a sentimen
against taxes of this kind ever since the or
ganization of the government ann one FOL
which there was some reason In days OF com
parative equality among our people. before tn
accumulation Of the vast fortunes which ha
been such feature of the develop ment Of thi
country In the past 80 years beyond anything
ever witnessed before In any other country
or age Of the world. 1t IS the duty of De-
mocracy now to stop the systems OF govern
mental favoritIsm which have been so large
factor In the accumulate OF these fortunes
Why is 1t not just also to 80 adjust the bur
dens of society as to make this new and tire.
men dously developed wealth bear something
like its just share!
The principle OF taxation is thai 1t Ia pay
ment for the protection afforded by law or
by government, and that all property and
lives should contribute In proportion to the
benefi received by means OF this protection.
We all recognize the principle In state and
local affairs, however imperfectly we may
carry 1t out, and all our state systems of tax.
alton are an effort to reach basis of justice
on this principle. But our national system
OF tax alton by tariff and excise, Is laid with
and so strong are the habits of opinion that
when 1t is proposed to return to 1t, there is
chorus of denunciation all over the land. The
protection afforded by the federal govern
ment. by the maintenance of armies and navies,
The support of courts. the guarding of COM
merce, the Transmission of malls and all the
mu hilarious work 1t performs, does not differ
essentially from that OF state and local gov
In being protection of property
Is well as persons. II there is any difference
If degree 1t Is on the property side as regards
he national COVER nment.
But when 1t comes to taxation or collecting
he pay for this work, 1t is done regardless OF
be benefits conferred. Our federal taxes are
II on consumption, and eliminating those on |
nxuries or worse, liquors, beers and tobacco
Which are voluntarily paid, they collect APP
as much from the day laborer
8 from the millionaire who gets perhaps
thousand times 80 much benefit. That is, the
DOR man and his family will eat and wear
pproximately as much of the things on which
ariif taxes are and necessarily must be laid,
. the rich. Take for example sugar, which
ffords the best illustration of both revenue
nd protective tariff; any pody can see that
tax on sugar bears not the slightest relation
!, the right basic principle.
These taxes on consumption are not only
le fixed and reversible policy OF this and
L other governments, but they are defensible
a means of raising part of the revenue.
Ike the poll tax In Vermont. for instance,
lev are q return for the protection to per-
IDS afforded by government and 1t Is right
lat all persons who enjoy that protection
,ould pay for 1t. But such taxes go but a
,ry little way and not necessarily at ALL tow
DIS collecting pay for the protection afforded {
property. The justice of the income tax
IS In the fact that 1t does this with almost
,rfect precision.
1t Is the most flexible Of all taxes in that 1t
10 be raised or lowered from year to year
correspond with the nece ssities of govern s
ent,as tariff taxes cannot without disturb q
zee to business. 1t has been decided by the '
preme court to be constitutional tax, as v
d been denied for generations. n
II is curious fact that the United States o
most alone of the great nations of tie world a
neither under free trade or protective sys- b
ms, Is the one that does not impose such q v
X. England, Germany. Austria, Italy and Ii
ance impose 1t. SO does Switzerland. the b
rest democracy on earth, the govern ment Ell
at appro 4ches the nearest to the ideal OF b.
uaIity of human rights. 1t has remained a
r America, protesting to do away with 7
|stocracies and privileged classes. to favor N
,alth In the way of taxation as even the It
,narchies of Europe will not in this age of N
'lliz stion. 1t is time to do away with the b
omoly. p
Every one of the objections urged against b,
, income tax, Its "1Dquisitorisn character, e.
, difficulty OF Its collection. the danger that
honest men will avoid 1t, &C., &C., applies OF
ID equal force to every other form OF taxa. :"
n that can be devised, except that of the OF
nry George single land tax. oil
The fact that person can never be fully u
e that bis desires will be carried out al
er he leaves this vale of ain and sorrow II 4C
depends wholly upon legal protection, mas ct
resh illustration just now. When that great NJ
yer, the late Gen. Ben F Butler, published Ct
interesting autobiography few years S,
ce. he took especial pride in stating 10 the F
face that be had made such exact legal ar IN
gements that 1t wonld be utterly impos- til
10 for bis book to be sold at nomina bI
,e as was the Grant book at that time re
". however, with Butler hardly more than 10
lis grave, respectable Boston newspaper Sc
fiering the original Butter book on cou- al
scheme at price even lower than The ia
mt books ever reached. co
tie
BE London Speaker, a Gladstone organ. .,
ports rumors that have long been current
detsIled outline of plan on the part
be Tories t. meet Gladstone with home IN
bill not only for ireland but for Eng a.,