The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-09-07
TAXATION AND PROHIBITION
By GEO. W. MDANIEL

A tract is being circulated in which
ii is contended that Taxes must be
increased on all property II the ex-
pertinent (prohIbition) II tried in
Virginia; nothing can escape the tax
burden" An adroit argument is
made, calculated to mislead the tax
payers. In order that voters may not
be deceived. the following discussion
is presented to their truth-beeking
minds.
Suppose Taxes Were Increased.
/. II the State lost all the liquor
revenue and received no compensa
ten in improved conditions. increased
values or otherwise. twenty-six cents
per capita would about provide for
that loss. Therefore. whoever votes
against prohibition simply because he
fears q raise in taxes practically sells
his vote for twenty-six cents. That
was q cheap price even before the IL
literate and purchasable vote was
eliminated by the constitution.
2. The evils Of the liquor traffic are
of such magnitude as cannot be
measured ny A0hGys onc IAdA
ruined by the saloon Ia worth more
than all the taxes paid by the liquor
traffic. Would you sell your boy to
the saloon for half million dollars?
3. Every dollar OF revenue de-
rived from the saloon La income from
a corrupt partnership between the
State and the liquor traffic. Such a
partnership is unholy and ought to
be dissolved. The proceeds are faint
~ 49,
Even II II were true that taxes
would be increased by prohibition,
that should not deter any one who
values a man above q sheep from sup
porting prohibition.
Taxes VIII Not Be Increased.
An analysis OF tho finances of the
State proves the falsity of the whiskey
argument 1t is not true that the
abolition OF the liquor traffic will in
crease taxes. Study the financial con-
dition Of Virginia for yourself. and
you viii discover the truth. The fol-
lowing figures are taken from the Of
fetal reports of the auditor Of public
accounts:
Total State revenue for
year ending Sept. 80.
Total State revenue for
year ending Sept. so.
lyI3 dsS3u, S3osuS
Gain for three years.
from 1910 to la13... 1891. 355.07
Average increase per
year for three years. 40i. 451.69
II Will thus be seen that the increase
OF our State revenues. under a uni
form rate of taxation and u uniform
method of assessment for the last
three years, has amounted to one mil
lion. two hundred and thirty-one
thousand. three hundred and fifty-five
and seven one-hundredths dollars
f$123l, 555.0T). or an average an
nj al increase OF four hundred and ten
thousand, four hundred and fifty-one
ard stxty-uiue one hundredths dol
lars ts4te,451.ee).
II we maintain for the next three
years lfrom 1918 TO 1870 the aver
age natural annual increase in the
accumulation of property that we
have maintained for the past three
years, we would have a total revenue
In 1915, after deducttng all liquor
taxes considerably greater than we
now have with liquor taxes included.
To illustrate: The revenues for 1913
were s7.330. $500. deduct from this
s54S. ST1.ST. the amount received for
liquor licenses, cispensaries, etc. i'm
10 8. and we have left se.TS2, i6a.l5
secured from all sources other than
liquor. Add TO this the average an
nual increase for three years. or I'M
I'll 1916, the year when prohibition
will go into effect. and we will have
the sum of ss.ol3.51s.22 for revenue
in 1915. exclusive of liquor taxes. or
nearly seven hundred thousand dol
lars more than we have now with
the liquor taxes included.
FActs In the Case.
The truth is that the liquor traffic
Is an expense to the farmers of Vir-
ginia. The present license system
gives the wet cities monopoly. II
the liquor business Is so profitable,
Why shouldn't Leesburg. Warrenton
and other communities have as much
right 10 engage in this business as
Norfolk or Richmond? Not only are
they denied a privilege granted wet
communities: they are also taxed to
bear the expense caused by the liquor
business.
Taking the figures from the report
OF the State board of charities and
corrections and the State auditor. and
charging the liquor traffic with its
percentage OF pauperism, insanity and
crimes we have
~ per cent or pauperism
cost ......,.... SieS,S4i.Vf
81 per cent of insanity
cost " eo4.seo.so
SIS per cent or CRIME cost. 4se,1Si.oe
total cost chargeabie to
liquor traffic. S2o,sSS.S2
Revenues received from
liquor traffic .-....... 5aS,87LS7
LOSS on account of
liquor traffic. -. 21T.Isl.4o
The Taxpayers Of Virginia are pay
ing nearly 100000 annually to per-
init 1000 liquor dealers to fill their
purses and destroy our boys. 1t Is
ar, expensive business for every one
except the few directly Interested IN
the sale OF intoxicants.
Prohibition Promotes Prosperity.
Prohibition will enhance the wealth
OF the State. When liquor is no long
er sold. there will be more money for
every legitimate business Drinking
is extravagant for the individual. the
community and the Commonwealth.
Did you ever know anyone to drink
himself rich? Then a city can't do It.
and the Commonwealth can't do 1t.
Prosperity attends prohibition. The
governor OF North Carolina says the
revenues of the Old North State last
year were $1,430,5So,.38 above the
last year OF the licensed saloon.
School terms have increased from four
to six, eight and nine months He
ads. ANnrfh Carolina has never