Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1909-11-30
[To be Continued
TO TAX BACHELORS.

TO TAX BACHELORS.
states That would Make Men Marry
or Pay q Tax.
What to do about the alarming In
crease Of unmarried men is problem
more pressing than what to do with
our ex-presidents. A man who can
successfully fill the highest office In
our government should be able to take
care of himself, but a mar without
wife-well, the feminine portion of the
population have their doubts. The In
crease in the number of bpin2ters has,
of course, kept pace with THAI OF the
bachelors, but-whether Justly or no
the latter get all the blame.
Various remedies for bachelorhood
have been suggested, ranging from
social ostracism to chloroform, but the
favorite corrective seems to be bach
elor tax. Numerous bills Of this ma
ture have, at different times, been In
troduce in the state legislatures, and
at the present writing there are at
least four states where as5emblymen
| will offer a bachelor bill.
In Iowa the proposed tax is $25 per
annum, in Missouri $50, and in Texas
it runs from $40 to $25-depending on
the age of the offender. The Texas
bill also provides that each eligible
bachelor shall propose to atleast one
woman each year under a penalty OF
double tax. AS there are 100000
bachelors in this state and eligible
spinsters are infrequent, the provision
| would probably compel the unmarried
women to follow the custom OF the
magazines in declining manuscripts
and send their numerous suitors print
ed rejection slips. These slips could
read:
Dear Sir: Miss So-and-So regrets
exceedingly that she Is compelled to
decline the heart and hand you have
so kindly submitted for her considera-
ton. For various reasons a proposal
may not be found available, and yet
may meet with acceptance elsewhere.
So many offers are received that 1t Is
impossible to proffer individual crit
icism, but it is only fair to say that
rejection does not necessarily imply
lack of merit. Thanking you for your
courtesy I am, yours sincerely.
This plan would save deal OF time
and the rejected suitor would file his
rejection slip away, and when the tax
assessor called offer 1t in proof that he
should be exempt from a double tax.
The Texas tax would probably bring
the state, s2,000,O0O annually, and even
in Missouri the revenue derived from
the proposed tax would be $5OO,OOO.
From these figures, 1t is evident that,
as a revenue measure, the bachelor
tax would be success-but, for that
matter, 80 would a tax on people
! blessed with red hair or large ears,
and from a revenue standpoint, one
law would be as just as another. 1t
| would be class legislation based on
LONELINESS and loneliness.
But will the proposed statutes have
the desired effect? Will bachelors
forsake single blessedness to avoid
an annual tax? To answer In the af-
frmative would be far from flatter-
ing to the intelligence Of our single
| men, for any one who has mastered
the multiplication table should know
that a $25-or even a $50-tax would
be a small matter compared to the cost
of keeping a wife, not to mention
prospective family Of children.
The deluded bachelor who married
to save money would be badly disil-
lusioned man the first time the wife
came home from a shopping expedi-
| ton.
Just what effect such legislation
| would have can only be surmised.
Like other taxes 1t would be evaded
where possible and some single men
| would probably leave the states where
these laws were enacted. That some
would marry to avoid paying the tax
goes without saying, but would such
mercenary men be desirable husbands!
In considering motives for marriage
women without wealth have always
had one advantage over the men.
When a man proposes to poor girl
it is good evidence that he loves her.
while, should she accept him, the man
has yet to determine whether 1t is for
love or a living. If the bachelor tax
| should become a law the women Will
then have to decide whether the man
who proposes Is in love or unable to
pay his bachelor tax.
| A Wisconsin assemblyman who has
introduced a bachelor tax says that
many people wish to marry, but don't
know how to go about it. This is un-
doubtedly true, and many who h1ve
succeeded in marrying didn't know
how to go about 1t either. They went
about it, some Of them, as though they
were buying a horse or bargaining for
piece Of real estate, and others mar
ried on sight, got acquainted when
they had time, and then regretted
wasting the time. The assemblyman
hopes to remedy this sad state OF ar
fairs by a state marriage bureau,
which is one of the features Of his bill.
This Is not freakish, as would at first
| thought appear. Isn't marrying as
| important as stock-raising or growing
turnips s?-Chattanooga Sunday Times,