The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1912-08-24
kEEp TO THE MAIN ISSUE

kEEP TO THE MAIN ISSUE
TAe publication of the ncome tax returns on
lie in the Office OF state Auditor c. Lee Moore
bringing out the fact that the income reported
.er taxation by all az the candidates for the
urv administrative board are surprisingly
small has focused public attention upon those
candidates who are known TO draw salaries in
excess Of the amount reported and upon those
Who have rested their appeal for votes upon
tier business experience.
some Of these candidates nave explained The
facss. winnie others have preferred 10 make no
rtference 10 the matter
Those who have neglected TO take the voters
5nt8 taesr confidence later and when they DO
j: is 10 be hoped that they will meet the issue
Kissed in some other manner than that selected
sy those wno nave spoken, II they follow
another course they will have tho advantage
OF thu others, for these have not met The issue
~ squarely ~ could be hoped Al this
stage Of the developments few beiir~e that the
candidates for the board are seeking 10 eYade
5G.. issue Rather 1t is a belief tina they have
missed the point and it Is with no feeling that
tit r. UeFH F3aldAlpU ol AAE 4hN 4 nat
tae voters await explanation from those here
tufo5e silent and further enjightment from
those who have already undertaken to explain,
they have missed Those who have taken
sae trouble - explain the apparent shrinking
ut thejr Incomes when the tax assessor came
around One Of the candidates mas rested his
claims for election upon his business expert
cree ana success IN aiding III The Increasing
commercial Importance OF Richmond and that
10 is making a sacrifice in offering for an
office paying $4,000 per year Yet his income,
according 10 his report the commissioner
,. revenue is less than 81 900. Others receive
salary ia excess OF So 00o and yet report
less than tbas amount 70 the commissioner +.
Here is the point Mere they sincere when
they reported that their present incomes are
less than the salary attached TO the office they
seek In plain English, have they told the
truth in their reports TO the TAX assessor
Every one knows thar portions OF the income
received by nearly every citizen are exempt
That man may receive salary IT. more thar
600 and yet under the Law, be- compelled
10 pay no tax Is undeniable When, however
a man whose salary from the city is more thar
$4,000 or when he tells the voters that in seek
my an Office paying 5000 he is making
sacrifice and yet ne returns less than $1,000
o. less than hiss known salary for taxation III
voters naturally WISH to know the ~hyfore
For the candidate to answer that ne paw
texes on property and that the State receive
considerable amount from him in the wa
ol taxes on other than incomes is beside tia
question The people ara not greatly inter
ested other than through human curiosity II
row much a citizen pays the state In taxes
The amount has no bearing on his qualihca
tons for office That he pays all that he shoui'
On his property is commendable and that th'
amount il large is a satisfaction to the tax
payer In thai be has valuable property OF
which 10 pay L. but the public cares Ittlt
about that phase Of the question, What I
wishes 10 know is. Does he pay all that il
tae the State on his income? The tax book
seem to say no It is up to the candidates L
explain the apparent discrepancy between bill
known income or the income he has claimed
as an argument as 10 his fitness for the Office
and The income reported 10 the commissioner
o. the revenue.
Every one OF the candidates involved ma!
have reasonable explanation 10 offer. Each
may be- able TO explain the circumstances K
tie entire satisfaction even of his opponents
~ enemies The point Is, however that the!
have not done so They have pointed 10 tn,
amount Of property they possess and tn,
amount Of taxes they have paid.
All right Now let's have an explanation a,
to the apparent Indictment contained in the in
come tax reports
THE TRUTH ALREADY OFT.