The Democratic press. [volume] (Ravenna, O. [Ohio]) 1868-1901, 1894-11-21
THE DEMOCRATIC PRESS.
The Income Tax Again.

reliance on the specious invention designed |
to bring into disrepute just and useful law.
Because of prospective fraud and perjury |
and concealing of incomes of prophetic |
:" pulls f" between millionaire subjects of the |
statute and officials commissioned for the |
collection of the tax because some will par |
tally or wholly escape while the rest must |
pay in full in short, because of theoretical |
of execution the enactment is |
one of mischievous import, fit only to be |
condemned and repealed. In addition to
this the law is more or less denounced as
vile specimen of class legislation, a tribute
on brains" and " industry" and "honor-
able endeavor," &C., &c.
Among the many published criucisns
against the measure we have yet TO see one
that did not start many degrees this side of
first principles. The justification or inequity
of the law is arrived at only by measuring it
from the ground up. But, as usually hap
pens where self instead of principle lies at
the bottom of course of conduct, the prop
osition on which is laid the greatest stress
and which is urged most persistently, is the
one least worthy of disputative consideration.
To say that measure is hopelessly vicious
or inherently wrong because it cannot be
perfectly enforced, is a specimen of states
manship compared to which Coxeyism is
sane and sound. The same objection ap-
plies with emphatic force to every tax law
in the Union. 1t is the universal testimony
of officials that large fortunes and properties
are covered up" to degree utterly i'm
possible for the individual of moderate
means to do. The burdens of taxation thus
fall on the middle, or producing classes, on
whom the prosperity of the country depends.
If freedom from violation or abuse be the
criterion, then every law in the country
should be abolished and anarchy substituted,
Is there any proof or indication that this law
will be peculiar above its brother tax laws
in this respect? To plead the statute of
weakness" in behalf of Uncle Sam is the
height of puerile absurdity. The methods
of executing a law is a very different thing
from the lawitself. The objection in subject
applies wholly, if at all, to the former, and
constitutes no reason whatever why such a
law is not right and just, or should not be on
the statute books. Should experience with
the measure reveal defects in the operative
machineryit will then be time to remedy the
matter. The Australian ballot law has been
altered and amended in various particulars,
but the principle has never been interfered
with or disturbed. Indeed, it was to give
greater force and expression to the princ1-
pie that the changes were made, and II the
principle underlying the income tax beright
it then becomes the duty and should be the
pleasure of these captious complainers to
assist in devising remedies for whatever i'm
perfections may be detected in the modus
operandi of the law But instead of that,
they demand its repeal before it has been
given trial? Further comments unneces-
sary.
But the " Un-American Monstrositys' has
been attacked because of its alleged class
discrimination. Rightly or wrongly our
present social system has given rise to ex-
tremes of "classes," and our laws must
therefore deal with the conditions as they
are, and while many enactments are on our
law books that are wrong in the abstract they
nevertheless become right because of their
surroundings and application. There is an
unwritten law in the mind of the average
citizen that the accumulation by individuals
of such enormous properties is morally
wrong, and it is one of the evils against the
well being of the masses that must be dealt
with by the statesmen OF the future. 1t
should be remembered that all our laws and
institutions are but human; that as men pro-
gress to a higher estate, conceptions and
practices once considered righteous become
of an opposite character in succeeding gen.
.-o4.o~e ic tho law of huma0
law, and the manifest duty of an enlightened
people is to advance toward the ideal instead
of away from it. Because thing is legal by
no means insures its righteousness, other
wise the question in subject could not be
under discussion now.
All wealth is created by labor, but not
every possessor of wealth is alaborer. Under
the existing social system a few individuals
have been enabled by superior financial
cunning and inetinct to monopolize SO much
of the material wealth of the country that at
the present time one per cent of the popula-
ton own more Than the remaining SO per
cent. 1t is not in the moral arithmetic to
figure out any justice or equity in this state
of economies. Manifestly there is need OF
radical changes in this great particular, but
it is idle to expect them in day. The law
of evolution is omnipresent and attaches to
the social development of man as certainly
as to the creation of plant. But progress
is the word and the income tax is one OF the
pioneer factors in the ultimate solution OF
the mighty problem of establishing higher
and better socialestate. The advantages and
prestige of wealth are so disproportionate to
offo
to.fnancial mediocrity that an equal rate.of
taxation between the two is patiently out of
the moral equilibrium. As long as men
possess the prerogatives of wealth let them
pay for them, for it is matter of simple
Justice, and takes from the producer the
double burden of paying in an equal ratio
with the millionaire while deprived of his
peculiar privileges. If "pay for what you
receive be right then it is eminently so for
the possessors of these social franchises,
whose title is exclusive, to pay for them.
Again, the average income above $4,000
per year is not that of the toiler in the ranks
of imperative industry, supplying the de-
mands of the 10Th century civilization. 1t
is realized in the main by those who come
under the head of money manipulators,
specuIators who traffic in the necessities of
humanity without ever contributing to the
creation of their supply. So that the law in
no sense falls on the honest toiler, but rec
ognlzing what he has already contributed to
the common fund exempts him from further
tribute It credits him with what he has
done, and charges and collects from the
other partial equivalent of what he has not
done. The income tax above s., 600 is mat
ter of law and not of social equity, so that
the tax is very small offset against the in
dustrial obligations due and unpaid from
Its subjects. Taxes should at least be paid
proportionately by the monied few with the
citizen of ordinary means, but we do not fear
honest contradiction when we say this is not
the case in single State or political COM
munity in the country. Given considera-
BILE fortune or property, yb the manipulation
of which incomes exceeding $4,000 are
learned" and it follows with almost unva-
rying regularity that these same incomes
have paid much less toward the maintenance
IL.