The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1897-01-02
STATE REVENUE REPORT.
Harris and Galveston Counties En-
forciag Collections
ALL CLUBS SHOULD PAY A LICENSE
~. Morrison suEsests that Taxcs
Paid by the Different Glasses Of
Dealers should Ne Eauaiised.

Austin. Texas. December so.--The fol.
lowing IL the text OF State Revenue Agen
Morrison's report for the year 1896:
To His Excellency, c. A. Culbcrson. Gov.
ernor.
e.Dear Sir: I have the honor OF submit
~ to you my report Of the work done by
me. since my appointment as State rev, nue.
+ agent. on the LIST day OF January, 1895.
Upon entering upon the duties Of this
office I found large number of cases
pending in the criminal district courts of
Galveston and Harris counties. for viola
lions Of the State liquor law. These os SEES
we're for following the occupations OF liquor
dealers withoI. FIRST having obtained H.
cense. during the years 1895 and 1924.
Having to depend almost entirely Tor evil
dence upon the records OF the internal rev.
cnue office in the prosecution of these par
tics. and owing to the fact that this Office
had changed hands. We Thought 1t best TO
compromise these cases and secure the best
results possible for the State This We sue
cceded in doing and collected something
over $4,000 by this compromise from the
two counties. The grand jury then found
between 400 and 5ac indictments for similar
violations OF the law during the years 1894
and 1899 With evidence furnished through
this office we convicted quite a number
OF dealers, both in Galveston and Harris
counties, which resulted in large Increase
in occupation taxes collected from these
sources In the two counties.
During the years 1885 and 1894 the State
only collected from liquor dealers In Gal
weston county s4soo and from beer dealers
$1,000. making total from these sources
OF 1900 In the years 1894 and 1898 tbcrc
was collected from the liquor dealers
$4,000, and from the beer dealers slSiS0
making a total of $3.50. an increase last
year over the year before OF sislSl The
amount collected in Harris during the years
1893 and 1874 from whisky dealers was
sl3iO0 and from beer dealers sl5.i50. total
amount collected. SO a50. For the years
1894 and 1895 the State collected from
whisky dealers Sal 200 and from beer deal
ers. 81, i50. total amount collected SStls0. !
or an Increase last year over the previous
year Of s9i 300 The large number OF cases
on the dockets Of the criminal court in I
these TWO counties has been a VERY hcsvy /
tax on my time. have had to spead about 1
one week Of each month siuco nv appo!nt- |
ment. in attendance on the criminal cour;
IN these counties, but feel sure tina; the 4
money spent In the prosecution OF ,hese 1
cases has been well spent not alone on .
account OF the increased revenue from these
sources IN the counties 81 Galveston and [
Harris. hat the convictions secured in these
cases has resulted In q striote~ enforce
ment CT the occupation tax law throughout
the State. While the total amount f.tetrs4d
last year from drslors IN whisky and herr
onlf exceeds the amount recc!veyi In iSs4
and 1923 81 s.. 81. yet IN cumming M the
~oFA oour We must take into consideration
the fact that the State sus,A!pe-, A loss
from these sources Of SIS 0e8 pad by coun-
tics in 1898 and lset. which. on accoun, a:
having adopted lecal option in their entire
territory. paid nothing to the State lhst
year. and IN addition 10 this Ausp-nt. there
was large number o, counties where svb-
divisions % the counties Adontesa local |
option thereby depriyiag the s;S,e G, anr
revenue from these sources
IL has occurred to me that there should
he some amendments 10 the law regulating
the sale of liquor My opinion Is that our
laws ought to conform as near ~ POSSIBLE
10 the laws @, the United States In ,he
of this traffic at loas, Is IA, as
i Is practicable. While in this yetn-t I I
10 not deem It necessary TO enter into A / {
detailed discussion o. all the changes thar ]
think should be made In The law rer,I- G
stns the sale ot liquor, yet there are one {
y TWO items N the law that desire 10 \
All your attention to II
Under oar law there is no difference mad.
n me amount Of taxes paid by holeSaie Z
'ealers and that paid by retailers have 5
,ever thought that this was light think d
"at any business should be taxed On thc {
ass or the amount Of business transacted r
verythine else being equal. Au, IN mis- !,
nstAnce We have fixed the tax without any /
'terehcc 10 the amount OF business being /,
one, the character OF tho business heinr
ne same. ! think II would not he unfpsf
nat the tax Of the wholesale dealers sho,,l5 "
increased TO at least double the an,o,,r.
aid hy retail dealers Tho same sight a
Z said ot hecl dealers The State ,,,iiSrts >
tax OF $50 for beer dealers. without mn, =
'terence 10 the amount o. business aors ;
M there IS no special tax on brewers ana u
nile the United States government coil n
CTS from hreweries In this state nh,u, 81
$4,000 IN round numbers. We only colleri II
.oul SIa1 believe law should be