Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1894-07-11

act such a measure without getting the
judgment of the country upon it.
IL. AS proposed, the tax is distinct
ly class tax. 1t is not, like the Eng
liSh income tax, imposed on all incomes,
with very moderate exemptions. On the
contrary, the majority of incomes are eX-
empted: only Il minority are taxed.
Iii. The tax is further unj just in that,
in the nature of the case, it bears more
hardly on men whose income is ali
money income. 1t will be collected first
from salaried men; then from lawyers
and doctors, whose income is composed
of fees. Merchants manufacturers and
farmers, whose incomes are in goods,
the value of which is generally unde-
fined and often undefinable, though their
real income may be as large, will pay no
tax or a small one.
Nv. Experience proves that this in
Justice will be further aggravated by
dependent on the statement of the person
taxed. The honest and the optimistic
will be heavily taxed; the dishonest and
the less sanguine will escape taxation.
This was VIGOROUSLY the fact during the
civil war; there is no reason to suppose
that it will be otherwise now.
w. The process of collection is in
QulsltOral and veXatiOus. 1t is no
adequate answer to this objection to re-
ply that the collection of taxes on per-
sOnal property is inquisitorial and vex-
auous. That may be a reason for abol-
1Shlng all taxes on personal property, or
all taxes except on income-producing
property, such as bonds and stocks, which
can be collected without inuuisition One
vexatiOus tax does not justify another
YeXatlOuS tax.
"VI. The tax is wrong in principle
Taxes should be levied on property, not
on industry. There is a reason why the
landlord who owns q hundred houses
should pay more tax than the householder
who owns one, for his hundred houses
require more of all the advantages
which government affords. and for
which governmental money is paid. A
tax levied on income derived from in
vested property is therefore inherently
just, and the fact that part of it is paid
by widows and orphans does not make
it less just. 1t is right that they should
pay the expense of protecting their prop
erty. But tax levied on incomes de-
rived from personal industry is not just
The personal industry which earns $10,-
600 asks no more from government and
costs government no more than the per-
sOnal industry which earns $1,000. The
only reason for such a tax lies in the
a good ground for expecting larger vol
untary contribution, but not a good
ground for levying larger enforced
contribution.
IL. IL uOoS not Su1nCe as q reply to
these considerations to say that an in
come tax is not SO unjust as a protective
system. The Democratic party is not re-
duced to this HObsOn's choice. He who
defends the income tax, as proposed in
the pending measure, must show that
free raw materials, a moderate tax on
imported articles of common use a
higher tax on articles of luxury, and q
reasonable tax on incomes directly de-
rived from invested property, would not
| be sufficient to meet the expenses of the
government economically administered
| Until this has been shown, there is no
just and reasonable ground for the re-
introduction of the income tax, sc reluct-
antly submitted to during the war, and
so promptly repealed at the close of the
war.
Some Remarks Free Wool.
At last the free traders in the Senate
have carried a majority vote for free
wool. 1t was not a large majority, but it
is believed that it was a safe and per-
manent one. The Republicans resisted
this blow at the farmers to the last
| They appealed to these free trade de-
structives to spare the property and in
dustry of million of wool farmers
| They exposed the gross inconsistency of
! this vote and demonstrated it's fayOritiSm
| and sectional spite. Every other in
dustry except wool and lumber found
some favor with the Democratic maiori-
ty. The sugar planters and the sugar
trust appealed for protection and it was
granted with a liberal hand. The rice
farmers of North Carolina demanded pro-
lection to save that industry from ruin
and it was granted. Even the producers
of peanuts were recognized and their in
duStry was guarded by a high tariff. But
the finance committee and the Demo
cratic majority turned deaf ear to the
farmers from the start. No argument
or appeal or remOnStrance made the
least impression. The wool industry must
be destroyed, This has been the purpose
Of the free traders and of the Democratic
leaders for many years. 1t is q strange
and infamous assault upon a great in
dustry and upon the farming class
Hitherto in our history the farmers have
been favored and popular class. They
have been regarded as one of the great
| essential supports of our government, and
their prosperity and advancement as nee
essary to the continuance of free insti-
tutiOns. The nation has relied upon the
courage, intelligence and loyalty of the
farmers IN all the crises of its career
and our history shows that this reliance
was not misplaced. In every eXigency
and struggle of our national development
and progress the farmers have been con-
SpicuOus for their devotion to the union
and the republic. From Washington
down to Cleveland all our statesmen, all
our parties have united in their efforts
to promote the interests, the comforts
and the success of the farmers 1t is re-
served for this era of Clevelandism, sec
tionalism and prOfiigate politics for q
great party and section of the country to
make war upon the farmers of the North