The Lebanon express. (Lebanon, Linn County, Or.) 1887-1898, 1895-10-18
SOCIETIES not TAXED

caiieu upon 70 aeclue hh M-
teresting and important question
between the assessor Of Multnomah
county and the churches. Hvrsto-
fore the assessor has omitted all
church property from the rolls.
In this way, thousands Of dollars
Of property, which bring in large
returns to the churniies, have
escaped taxation. In the same
condition are the many benevolent
institutions in the county. Tho
new assessor has included in his
list all such property, excepting
only such a. Is used solely for
church or charitable purposes.
claiming thin is the iax. He has
thus stirred up huge hornets
nest, every hornet with . different
appearances, but all bent in getting
THAR stingefs into the assessor, for
daring 10 DO his duty q the law
provides. At irst elahcs, the mat
tor would asam TO be d littls mo-
ment either one wayior the other.
But q mofS careful inquiry will
diHclors tho fact that these so-
cietiss own I vast amount Of prop
erty, aome of which ID used Tor the
peculisr pa,poae for which the So
cieties ID formed, while . vast
amount ID leased at . lsge profit.
I Many thoughtful people claim,
that 80 much Of this property ss 10
used, BY tAch church, for instance,
for place 81 worship, should be
free from tsxasion, while others
claim that all property thus owned
should be exempt. Others do not
think any should be exempt. The
assessor seems 10 b. right and the
court will likely sustain him. All
property should beassits eqnal and
just proportion of ths necessary
tax to be raised. Taxes are re-
quired to defray y expenses Of
maintaining the government, in
order that equal Prossction TO oil
men and all property may be as
sured. The mora propsrty man
or a socisty may nays, tho more
deairous he or the society il for
this profession. II no protection is
given, than be who has most will
likely lose most. Churches and
other such institutions own more OF
less property. They are never
backyard In. demanding ample pro-
lection from the government and
they receise il % freely 81 the ord
mary individual. Other people
pay for il, then Why not thsss So
cieties, WHOM they are but the ag.-
gregate Of ofindividuals2 The wealth
ofsindividusls is taxed. When this
wealth 10 contributed by these in
dividusls and put into . corpora
tion or society, the state still fol-
lows this saina wealth with its tax
lien. The wealth of churches il
contributed BY indisiduals. Then
why should not che state still fol-
low this same wealth with its tax
lien? OF course, the argument is
that the churches, with these other
societies Ar6 . substantial pnblic
benefit, and should, for this reason
not be taxed lor In that event their
power for gosd would be lesssned
by the amount required in isxes.
II can well Be adnitted, that
churches and other societies do M
immense deal Of good. But can il
be said, that this good is really 6
public goodf No man can enter
tho membership Of any church Of
his own right, but he must be ad.-
nitted. Far less can d man Of his
own right bscotile y member Of the
Masons Of the Odd Fellows. There
b no appeal TO The laW in ass no
Is refused admission. Then shsse
aoclesies arc not really public. Ii
d claimed that churches and Aocie-
ties do mach chsrlty work. That
is ssery true. But who ever heard