The herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1893-1900, 1895-10-16
CYcLERY FINES

Food for reflection is found in the fact
that the San Francisco board OF supervis-
ors has passed a law compelling pro-
prietors of cycleries in that city and
county to pay a fine of SIS quarter, or
$50 year, for conducting their business.
In fact, there is food for reflection in
very much OF the local as we'll as federal
legisat on of the age. The trouble is
that only small percent age of the people
refiect-no matter what kind of TODD is
placed before them. The average voter
and taxpayer had rather do almost any
thing than think. Having voted the reg
ulatlon ticket OF the party whose Collar
he wears, ne considers his duty as citi-
zen suspended until the next election
comes on. Then he again goes to the
polls and votes for whomsoever the po-
litical bosses may have selected for the
various offices. Meanwhile, when he
happens to do any thinking at all, it is
only no wonder why his yearly taxes are
SO high and his wages or profits so low.
In the case of the license fine imposed
on cycleries in San Francisco, it is re-
ported that fund will bs raised by op-
posers of this new form of officia robbery
we'll also to test the condition of the su-
perviscrs who sote1 for the act. A thor
ough test by competent scientific experts
might disclose within that county board
sevearl cases of moral obliquity. violent
insanity or hopeless idiocy. There must
be something radically wrong with
body of man that will thus ignors the
plainest principles OF justics and equal
ity. 1t is believed that the fine was i'm
posed in the interests of the street rail-
way companies as those benevolent cor
porations are annoyed by the competition
encountered in consequences of so much
bicycle riding. Be the motive what it
may. however. the principle involved In
the supervisorial act is vicious and with
out justification on any ground whatever.
Every body who has invest igated the
matter knows that license fine i'm posed
on persons who sell and rent bicycles
does not fall on the dealers them selves,
wheels. Like the federal tariff tax, and
every other tax, except that on land, the
bicycle tax is crooked, and must eventu-
ally be paid by some Other person. The
men and women WIN use bicycle and
not the dealers, are the persons who pay
tae fine. They have to pay IL in the
form OF increased prices on the wheels
they buy or hire. And they constitute
GLASS comprising hundreds for every one
person who deals IN the goods. So, in
reality, the San Francisco county st ates-
men are imposing q fine on every man
and woman who buys or hires bicycle
In that county subsequent to the adoption
of the new law. The same rule holds
trus with reference to every tax assessed
on business or on personal property IN
course of exchange. The courts recognize
this principle If taxpayers do not. As, for
example, the supreme court of California,
as set forth in the case of Hewitt vs.. Dean
OF al. suit appealed from Los Angeles
county and decided by the supreme court
IN 1890. Among other things, the court
SAID: Whenever the state imposes a
tax on commodity the burden of that
tax is borne by him whose necessities re-
quire him to purchase, and not by him
who holds it for SALE
Such language is plain enough to be
understood by any body of men, unless
It be- a board of stupidvisors, or some
otn Or stupid body of law m akers and law
thinkers.
OF cour e, this law emanating from the
San Francisco county restricnonists, is
no worse than hundreds of similar laws
and ordinances everywhere Matched up
public Off eials who, through the skill
Of political bosses and the pliancy of
IL Dir tools, the voters, are clothed with