Evening star., 1913-12-18

comparative showing as a contributor to
the national taxes. The District has
shared in every such tax and has un-
dergone special national burdens Through
its custom house it has made coutribu-.
tons to the national Treasury, and if
the consumers o. dutiable goods pay this
tax 1T has contributed far above the av-
erage of municipalities as one of the
large seacoast cities, which arc recoS-
ni1ed AZ the heaviest consumers of inn
po. ted and dutiabie articles.
In the recent House debate Represent
ative Prouty submitted a table in which
he had distributed the S6.OOO0uo paid
last year by the nation for capital main
tenance among the states according to
population, and credited each state with
contributing approximately that amour:
toward the expenses of the District. OF
course, no such contribution is actually
made. The different congressional con-
stituencieS and the different states con-
tribute to the national taxes in widely
varying amounts. Many constituencies
do not contribute as much to the national
taxes as the District itself does; and it
is hard to figure out how some of the
constituencies pay any national taxes at
all. If the graduated income tax on in
dividuals displaces the other national
taxes. and it comes to pass that the only
national taxpayers are the less than half
million income-boasting citizens out
of ninety-five millions of Americans. it
cific contribution in national taxes to the
National Capital .'mendicant' by the in
dignant congressmans outraged con-
stituency.
The only national taxes that fall direct
ly and Enthusiastically and in ascertainabie
amounts upon Americans are the inter-
nal revenue taxes. The states and terri
tories which contributed in the fiscal year
ended June so. 1909. less in internal rev.
enue collections of the national Treasury
than the District of Columbia are Ala
bama. Arkansas, Delaware. Georgia,
Idaho, Kansas. Maine, Mississippi.
Nevada, North Dakota. Oklahoma, South
Dakota. South Carolina, Utah. Vermont
and Wyoming tsixteen states). and Alas
l1a, Arizona. New Mexico and Hawaii
-four territories).
The per capita contribution OF the Dis
trict of Columbia for that year is greater
than that of Alabama. Arkansas, Connec-
ticut. Delaware, Georgia. Idaho. Iowa,
Kansas, Maine. Montana, Minnesota. Mis-
sissippi. New Hampshire, North Dakota,
Oklahoma, South Dakota. South Carolina,
Tennessee Texas, Utah. Vermont and
Wyoming twenty-five states), and Alas
ka. Arizona, New Mexico and Oklahoma
four territories)
The District of Columbia contributed in
the fiscal year ended June 30 1909 in
internal revenue taxation for the support
OF the national government more than
the combined contributions of Maine,
Vermont, Mississippi, North Dakota, Ne
oklanOInH ana wyoming.
The per capita contribution of the
Washingtonian to this national fund was
seventeen times as great as that of the
resident of Alabama. eighteen times that
of the resident OF Arkansas. ten times
that Of the resident of Maine. sixteen
times that Of the resident of South Caro-
lima, twenty times that of the resident of
Vermont and eishty-six times that of
the resident OF Mississippi.
Does not the Washingtonian pay enough
both in national and local taxes? Is he
in any respect favored by the legislative
body, which. not chosen by him. decides
for him all questions of equitable taxa
ton?
In the Matter of Mendicancy.
The figures above given concerning ma
tional taxation throw light upon the ques-
ton whether the average congressman's
average constituent is really robbed to
ease the tax burdens of the mendicants
residing in the District OF Columbia.
1t appears that the contribution of
such constituent to the national revenue
is infinitesimal, and, in the cases cited
far exceeded by tie contribution of the
Washingtonian himself. While the Dis
trict has no representation in the ma
tional legislature which is paid from
and which diSDIrSpS this national fund