The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-06-11
THEORY AND PRACTICE N TAX
ALTON.


other taxes are stupid or unjust he
would clear away all existing ways and
means Of raising revenue. national, state
and local. VIZ. the tariff. the internal rev.
enue imposts, the liquor licenses Of states
and cities. any existing taxes on fran
chises, on railway receipts. on sncces-
sions; ali these he would abandon, and no
other projects for raising revenue, such as
an income tar, must be entertained. Ae-
cording 10 Georges logic the single tar Is
nothing If net Single" 1t is not one
which might be engrafted upon the stock
Of an existing system. II obliterates the
idea that as all persons are under the pro-
lection OF the state, so all persons may. II
the public needs re guire. be called upon to
contribute not only their services but
their wealth 10 the support of the govern
mens and its reasonable purposes.
The single tax doctrine Is not TO touch
persons as such, but only as they are re-
ceivers OF the public in the income and
profit Of land. Under our present system
we hold that as all forms of property are
protected by the state. they may all be OF
right subjected TO taxation. If the public
needs require, bat the single tax men
know OF only one kind OF property which
may be justly taxed. Under our present
system we hold that as all industries and
empioyments are protected by the state.
the government may. if the public needs
demand, collect some fraction of the in
come and profit Of industry. provided it is
an honest and not q discriminating in
come tax, but under the single tax system
there is no possible room nor justification
for an honest income or succession tax.
This Is in substance Mr.. Atkinson's an
alysis OF the weakness and danger of the
single tar. Theoth day correspondent,
a good Democrat and good citizen, asked
the New York San the following ques-
tons:
"What does the San think of the
idea of providing for all the expenses
of the Federal government by direct taxa
tion3 No tariff. no internal revenue, no
income tax. no unconstitutional protec-
ton, no oppression OF selected American
industries. no inquisitorial and sociaiistic
tar on thrift. Does not the direct Federal
tax solve all of the complicated problems
before us7 Is il not tax reform in perfec-
toni"
The Sun answered these questions fairly.
not from the standpoint of q moon-eyed
theorist. but from the standpoint of q
practical statesman who never forgets that
the factor Of human nature cannot be left
out in the government OF society; that Is
compromises; what is practicable, il the
highest craftsmanship. not what is theo-
rctically possible The Sun replied that the
direct tax IS probably constitutional,
theoretically admirable in its simplicity.
inexpensive in its collection. but practically
very Objectionable, because in its actual
workings 1t would be about as inequitable
a scheme of taxation as could be devised.
The whole amount needed for the ex-
penses of the Federsl government would
be apportioned among the different states
according TO their population. The idea
OF the direct takers is that each state
should collect of its own citizens its own
share of the whole amount needed by the
United States government and then turn
the money over TO Washington City.
Under this system the townships or
diate collectors OF the Federal direct
tax. Tho taxpayer now pays one
tax bill, percentage of the amount
collected from him going into the
local treasury for local expenses.
another peSeesstage being passed on to the
county for county expenses, and still an
other 10 the state for state expenses.
Under the proposed system still further
percentage would be added for the Federal
tax, and. having been collected along with
the other taxes, IL would be passed on
through town, county and state until il
reached the Federal government. The tax
payers annual tax bill would be larger
would be relieved from Federal taxation
in any other form, direct or indirect
On its face this plan looks very sensible
aud equitable, bat the Sun proceeds TO
show that in practice a more inequitable
apportlonment of Federal expenses could
hardly be invented. because while on the
one hand the apportionment OF the Fed
eral tax would be equitable as between the
states themselves, on the other hand. as
between the counties in the state or the
townships in the county or the indiyidu-
ais in the township in would partake of
all the inequality and discriminating in
justice of the existing local methods Of
valuation and assessment.
The inequalities resulting from the pro-
teotive tariff are nothing to the Inequali-
ties of local assessment. and for this in.
equality human ingenuity has never yet
found a remedy. The San says:
"rhe selfish interests Of individuals are
constantly operating IN the struggle TO
throw the burden of taxation on 20 Others.
The same contest is going on peFpetuslly
between townships, with regard 70 their
shares OF county or state taxes. vast
number of PEOPLE escape local or state tax.
alton altogether, and although they nov
help 10 support the United States govern
mcnt because its tax falls bot upon what
they own but upon what they consume
under the new method proposed by the
direct takers they would be relieved Of the
necessity OF making even this small return
for the beneass and blessings OF clVillxa-
ton.
III msthods OF valuation and assess
msnt and collection were uniform through
out ali the towns add cities Of all the states
OF the Union, If every body paid his lust
share of local taxes under the present sys.
TEN. then there would be bass for an
equitable and satisfactory application OF
the Federal direct tat Untii the miiIen-
nlAl day when such = condition Of things
shall exist, any attempt 10 collect the
Federal revenue through the local tax
bills win be merely plslng injustice upon
injussiee."