The true Democrat. [volume] (Bayou Sara [La.]) 1892-1928, 1914-08-01
AS TO TAXATION.

We should be glad to see the Gov
ernor succeed in adopting some equi-
table and practical plan whereby the
burdens of taxation would fall equally
in proportion to their possession on all
the property owners of the state.
In so far as the tax dodgers are con-
cerned, they are wealthy class who
are invested in corporations, stocks
and bonds, and such other property as
is not exposed to the assessor.
The masses of the people, the small
land owner with his homestead and
attachments, already pays his full
share Of taxes. His property is all in
sight and cannot be hidden. And since
1t is confessed that the object of the
scheme is to raise more revenue, there
is danger Of over-taxing the citizen
with the small homestead.
Really no particular reform is need
ed except to enforce the assessment
of the big business crowd. The as
SCISSOR should be required to pursue
this class of tax payers closer and to
put more equitable valuation on
their property as compared to the
small homesteader and when this is
done. it is all done and there you are
with tax reforms Claiborne Guardian
Journal
The above embodies the usual argu-
ment against any Improvement in fix
ing assessments. The small taxpayers
protection is as effective for the pur-
pose as the widows COW which stands
as a bulwark against all stock laws in
towns and villages. And it may be
added that the wrong threatened the
small taxpayer is as mythical as the
animal that must be protected though
Ia hundred gardens and lawns suffer.
For while it is true that the small tax
payers property is open to the obserya-
ton of the assessor and the rich man
has stocks and bonds, which can be
easily hidden from official vigilance, yet
1t is obvious that some property.owners
Of wealth and influence possess land
also, or why do all efforts to revise as
sessments prove abortiye? The poor
man conducts no lobby to prevent the
passage of assessment bills, therefore
some one else must consider the mat
ter OF sufficient importance-apart from
the poor mans interests--to furnish
effective opposition against progress
in that direction. For example, the
Roberts bill was defeated, or rather so
metamorphosed in the Senate as to be
innocuous, and surely no lobby of poor
men did it. And yet the bill merely
provided that there should be geo.
graphical plan of assessment followed,
whereby every plat of ground on the
official map must be accounted for
Only In this way can it be certain that
all assessable land comes under OBJ
serVatlon. Now, the interests that de-
feated such measure must have had
lands yet undiscovered by the asses
sor, and they know it if he does not
1t cannot be the poor mans land for
it is told, that this property cannot be
hidden.
Again the Roberts bill provided for
publishing the assessment lists in
pamphlet form. What more effective
method could be devised to reveal un-
equal assessments and to see every
one to correct them. Yet some one
not the poor man-found the measure
distasteful.
Much is betrayed by the defeat of
the bill. 1t is shown that others are
hiding, as usual, behind the small tax
payer. The chances all are that if the
big tracts of land came in for assess
ment, the poorer people would have
less instead of more to pay.