The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-06-07

is easily exploded. The tax singles out
no particular class, creed, party, trade,
business or occupation. It is uniform
on all persons having an income over
a given figure. The exemption below
that amount is also uniform, it does not
discriminate against anybody, or any
class.
The taxing of incomes above four
thousand dollars year is fair ana
just measure to obtain revenue for the
expenses of government, from those
who are best able to bear the burden.
Therein is one of its chief recommen-
dations, and it is a complete answer
to the plea of its injustice.
AS to its being sectional the
charge is absurd. It is made the same
in every part of every state and ter
ritory and applies to no particular sec
ton any more than another. 1t is not
sectional in any sense whatever.
Every tax is more or less inquisito-
rial. so that charge against the income
tax will not have any weight. Look
at the tax forms furnished to property
holders for a statement of their effects.
Listen to the questions of assessors
who are required to find out the cash
valuation, of real and personal pro-
perty. You cannot levy just and
equal tax without diligent inquiry, and
it need be no more inquisitorial in the
case of an income tax than in any
other tax levied by law.
Another objection is that an income
tax smacks of socialism. Why? Be-
cause the rich have to pay it while the
poor do not? Is it not exactly the
same in regard to real estate? If
man holds title to land, he must
pay the tax on it; the man
who has none pays none. So
with any kind of personal property.
A man over a given age pays no poll
tax. but he who is under that age and
over another must pay the tax. Is that
socialisic?
But when we come to class taxation,
to socianstic taxation, to discriminate
ing and unjust taxation, what about
protection and the bounty system? 1t
taxes a number of classes for the bene-
fit of one class. It takes public money
and devotes it to private purpose.
1t is governmental interference
with trade and manufactures, and
that is socialistic and paternal in it's
very essence and interest.
The New York Post is ''agin" the
income tax 1t speaks for the wealth
Ter classes. 1t is down on that por-
ton of the tariff bill which proposes to
raise revenue by taxing the rich. But
unwittingly in roasting the bounty bus
mess it furnishes good reasoning in ia
vor of the income tax as well as against
the heresy OF protection. Here is what
it says on the subject:
The rich manufacturers of the east
VINO nave been G'eSleSlnS lne lHdlce
committee for bounty only make them
selves ridiculous when they stop to add
a protest against the income tax. They
are the very man who have made that
tax, in it's present offensive and dan
gerous form, certain to become a alw.
They have been holding legislation to
their will ana Tor rreir tanefit all
these years, and it has been, more than
anything else, a desire to make them
ray back part CT the nroft thew have
made out of governmental aid which
has led to the proposal to tax the in
comes of the rich. This is the truth
which the managers of the New York
to protest against the income
tax will do well to lay to heart. If they
come out squarely against all class
legislation, protectionist, as well as So
cialistic and Populist, we'll and good
But if any of the speakers or vice
presidents of the meeting can be de-
tected as men who have been moving
heaven and earth at Washington to get
money voted to them in their business,
their protest will lose all point and i'm
They will find it hard to
deny that special taxes are a fair
equivalent to special favors.