The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1908-04-22

tax. Let us see what a direct tax is defoed
TO be. Perry, on political economy, uses the
ollOwing language:
A direct tax is levied on the very persons
who are themselves expected 10 pay IT.; ,o,
The fact is. the producer did actually pay
An excise is one form of direct tax, and un.
der this specific head the cotton TAX properly
belonged, TIT had been legally levied. 'uose
Story rays: ,,
An excise ia an inland imposition or duty;
a duty or tax laid on certain articles proouc-
ed or consumed at home. .u,,
Here was an article produced ana largely
consumed at home. 1t was properly go hlect
to an excise, If levied In accordance Win tne
Constitution. But hear again the language OF
the Constitutions: -
All duties, imposts, and excuses shall be
Uniform throughout the United States.
That is, they shall fall with impartlality on
Maine and Texas alike. Does q tax on cotton
come within the requirementsH
CONSTITUTIONAL INHIBITION.
Again the Constitution says:
No capitation or other direct tax shall be
laid unless in proportion TO the census:
By The census OF 1880 the total population OF
the United States was 81 AS .0S9. and OF the
eleven cotton States 9,lO3, 1873. The total cot
ton tax collected amounted to sS 72,SSo w.
or this mount, eleven cotton states paio
1884, Ol. 352.76. Georgia paid over s;l,oOO,Oo AND
Main paid nothing. How ia this for laying
the Ia in conformity to the Constitution:
In proportion to the census or enumera-
tlon.
No tax or duty shall be laid on articles e1'
ported from any State.
At The time OF the collection Of the cotton
taxes more than half Of the entire crop was
exported abroad. A strict dennition OF Cne
word export" includes shipment from one
State to another. In this sense more IMAM
| four-dfths of the entire crop was exported.
| Nothing could be clearer than that the cotton
tax was. In this respect, violatlve OF the Con-
stltution.
EFFORT TO JUSTIFY AS A WAR MEASURE.
There are some who do not pretend 10 justi'
~ the cotton tax from a legal or constitution
al standpoint. but claim that 1t was q war
suspending the Constitution. While this le
| the only honest contention that can be set up,
it certainly could not be applicable TO the
taxes collected In 1867 and 1888, amounting &c
three-fourths OF the entire collections. when
| peace reigned throughout the land. AS foi
the taxes collected during the war, they may
have been justified by the rule OF might. op,
not by the rule Of right. An army may be
Justified IN conf1scating or destroying proper
ty, Az q legitimate war measure; but that 9
proud and powerful government Will oely
its own prescribed rule Of conduct, to TAX
under the guise OF law, a poor and oleeolnt
people, l refuse 10 believe.
THE DAY OF RESTITUTION.
If, blinded by prejudice and exAsperated by
| the resistance that hal for 80 l)ng set q
naught the Federal forces, the Government
did in haste that which was unwarrant d up
er the CONSTITUTE n, has not the day o
restitution come?
Perhaps few OF th original taxpayers ar
wing to enter their claims. The desoe nd
ants, in many instances, could establish jus
| claims, and any unclaimed amount might 81
turned over 10 the various State treasurers
for use In the common school fund.
/ Thio ANIMAL 20 n tho mimi QnEr the nQ6
sions have subsidized. 1t is not made In tn
name of charity, nor yet is 1t a demand, bu
plainly and u~nequivocally II is q call TO tn
iected must reflect upon the honesty OF tn
nation. Loud applause on the Democrat
side.