Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-03-24
ErcmDfiou of Church Property.


this week in the Jewish South, of this
city. 1t takes issue with us on an I'M
portant question. 1t seems, however, TO
US that all the arguments we have ever
read in favor OF taxing churches are an
swered by the fact that churches have no
selling value, and the State taxes values
not minus quantities. AS long as the
building is used as a church 1t yields no
revenue, has no selling value, and conse-
quenuy ought not to be taxed. AS soon
as IL ceases to be used as a church the
ground will have a selling value, ana
under the laws of Virginia will be taxed
In a word, when there Is anything 10
be taxed the State taxes it. When there
IL nothing to be taxed the State levies no
tax.
Trom the Jewish South)
In an article on church taxation in its
issue OF last Sunday the Dispatch agrees
with the Times-Herald, Of Chicago. that
legislation will eventually come TO the
point that church property of every klnd
devoted To religious uses shall be exempt
ed from taxation, but that all property
which. by the aid of the State and under
the protection of its laws, earns reve-
nue. as a competitor OF other revenue
earning property, shall pay its equitable
share Of the State under the operation or
whose laws II is enabled thus TO yield a
revenue
This ia only a compromise, in some
measure, perhaps, mitigating the great
abuses which have arisen from the eX-
emption Of church property from taxa
ton. But we are contending for princi-
ME. and are not satisfied with compro-
mise. The principle is that church pro-
perry, enjoying the benefits and protec-
ton of the community, which are PAID
for by taxation. has no moral right 10
accept these benefits and protection WITH
out paying for them. 1t is in enect
subsidy given to the Church by the STATE.
The fact that the State subsidies all
churches alike does not al all alter the
fact or soften its fault.
The basis Of taxation Is the protection
afforded by the community and the con-
yeniences which arise from organized So
ciety. Church property enjoys this pro-
lection and these conveniences, as is ac-
knowledged by the Dispatch. II should
give a quid pro quo. The fact that church
property as a rule does not earn anything
does not signify. II that rule were 10
apply. a lot out In Lee DISTRICT, whlch
does not earn anything except visits from
the tax-collector, ought also TO be ex-
eTrnt All the business houses. which
have been barely able 10 keep their
heads above water during the last Twelve
months ought also 10 be exempt
The cry OF double taxation Is vain
Every man who has business ana iives
IN a house Is taxed doubly. He is taxed on
his business and he Is taxed on MS nome
and his furniture. which are maintains
"a out of that business. He Is taxed fof
the city and taxed for the State; taxed on
his property and taxed on his income;
taxed on his debts through the banks
and taxed on his savings through the
building associations. and taxed becaus7
he has a head on his shoulders. we were
satisfied were we only doubly taxed
The Dispatch finally says that IT ''oc-
casionaIly hears Of q clergyman who pro-
! fesses TO be in favor OF taxing church
oroperty. but he Is very apt TO ministeE
| 10 a rich church or congregation VIVA.
| difference does that make? Is ne 10 De
blamed because his fortunate position
| does not blind his eyes to his dutyY IN ,he
| contrary. he ought to be the more Gre
| dited. for as q rule II II the rich corpora
tons who are the most artfrl tax DODGERS.
We repeat what we said some 'i'"'
| ago: 80. .a,,a NOT
"congreyation Beth Ahaba' couid no.
| 40 anything more conclusive 10 JUSTIFY
| us existence as an Institution, fnalntah-
| "a In the name OF faith which teaches
| the highest and purest in human Thought
| than voluntarily 20 reiinquish It's YAK
| exemption and refuse any longer 70 accep'
J that which In justice Is not hers.