The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1903-06-16
TWO PRINCIPLES OF TAXATION.

to our notice. The first is from Thomas =. WaC-
sons "Story of France" and is as follows:
Taxation, after all, is confscation. When the
government takes no more than it's just Dues and
exacts these from all, classes alike, the evil IS a
necessary evil, the sacrifice a necessary sacr1hce'
for it is right that the government should live at
the public expense. But when the government
confscates more than it needs, this is tyranny;
it is robbery under legal forms"
The other view is set forth by DR.. Charles u.
McIver in this manner:
ct has been too common a political teaching
that the best government is that which levies the
smallest taxes. The future will modify that doc
trine and teach that liberal taxation, fairly levied
and properly applied, is the chief mark of a civ
ilized people. The savage pays no tax"
Though these two expressions are so diverse
that they appear contradictory, we believe that
both are substantially correct and that each sup
plements rather than bellies the other.
The first thing to be considered in harmOninzing
the two doctrines is that Mr.. Watson and DR.. Nc
liver we're thinking of taxation for very different
purposes. Mr.. Watson was writing of the condi-
ton of France when cone half the gross product
of the farm was taken for the Kings taxes" and
when the province of Languedoc offered to sur
render all the wealth of the province to the King
if he would allow one-tenth of it to be enjoyed by
the owner free from all tax. Worst of all, prac-
tically none of the tax money wrung from the
French peasants was used in their behalf. They
had no schools; they had no postofices; they had
no improved roads; they did not get back one per
cent of the taxes they paid. 1t took $6Q,OOO,OOO a
year to maintain the court of royal idlers at Yer
sailles, and one of the mistresses of His Most
Christian Majesty, Louis XIV, gambled away
4,OOO,0 600 livres of public money in one night. The
taxpayer had no voice whatever in the expendi-
ture of public funds.
Of taxation for such purposes as this, we may
rightly say that it is confscation; that it is "rob-
berry under legal FORMS"
But DR.. McIver was not talking of French his
tory. He was making an educational address,
and the kind of taxation he had in mind is a sort
of cooperative self-help. He was thinking of
taxation for good schools, good roads, the en-
forcement of laws and the protection of the pub
lie. These things help every man in the COM
munity. And it is right that every man contri-
butte according to his means for their support.
Public taxation distributes the burden equally
among those who should bear it.
And of taxation for such purposes, we may
rightly say that cit is the chief mark of a civ
ilized people,"
We hold therefore that both Mr.. Watson and
DIR. McIver were right; that Mr.. Watson's prin-
ciple applies to all taxation for the running ex-
penses of the government, for standing armies
and costly buildings and extravagant appropria-
tions; and that DR.. McIver's doctrine is applica-
bic to all cases of taxation for the general up
building of the community, such as the improve
ment of the highways or the education of the peo-
pie.
The taxpayer will do well to keep in mind the
two conditions and the two principles. Let us not
in every instance act on the theory that taxation
is cOnfiscation. If we do, we shall soon find our
selves less prosperous and less influential than
other communities that tax themselves literally
for public improvements. Let us not in every in
stance hold that a new tax is an evidence of ad=