Democratic Sentinel, Volume 12, Number 15, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 4 May 1888 — REDUCE THE TAXES [ARTICLE]

REDUCE THE TAXES

Take Off the Burdens of Taxation and Increase Exports. SPEECH OF HON. B. Q. MILLS. Delivered in the House of Representatives, April 17. A War Tax Continued in Time of Peace. Result of a Trick Played by Monopolists. Their Promises Violated —Labor Cost of Production Lower in America Than in England Complete and Convincing Facts and Figures. Mr. Chairman: Our late civil war made it necessary that the burdens of taxation should be laid heavily in all directions authorized by the constitution. The duties on imports were raised from an average on dutiable goods of 18.84 per cent, in 1861 to an average of 40.29 per cent, during the five years from 1862 to 1866 inclusive. This was recognized at the time as an exceptionally heavy burden. It was stated by the distinguished gentleman who then presented to the house the bill so largely increasing the duties that it was demanded by the exigencies of war and must cease on the return of peace. He said: “This is intended as a war measure, a temporary measure, and we must as such give it our support.” After congress had so largely increased the duties on imports, and thus bestowed most liberal and generous bounties on our manufacturers, a light internal revenue tax was imposed on the products of domestic manufacture to help the government meet the heavy demands of war. The internal tax was but a tithe of the heavy burden imposed on the people by the increased duties on foreign goods. It brought to the treasury in 1866 $127,000,000 —a sum which was less than 5 per cent, upon the value of the manufactured product of that year. It was thought not to be unreasonable to require this small contribution from those whose bounty congress had increased from 18 to 40 per cent, in the price of their products.

THE WEALTHY EXEMPTED. But, Mr. Chairman, that tax is gone. It could not be retained. It was a tax on wealth. As soon as the war was ended the complaint was made that this tax was a war tax, and it was repealed. Congress imposed a tax on incomes, too, to help the government to meet the expenditures of war. It brought to the treasury in 18(16 $72,000,000. The official reports showed that 460,170 persons out of the whole population had incomes above the exemption, and they had $707,000,000 of net annual income, while the balance of the people had nothing beyond what was required for annual support. Yet scarcely had the war ended until this tax was declared to be exceedingly odious, inquisitorial and oppressive, and congress was asked to repeal it, and it is gone.

Besides these there were taxes on the receipts of railroad companies, taxes on insurance companies, taxes on express companies, taxes on bank capital, bank deposits and bank checks, but they are gone. Congress lent a willing ear to the demands of wealthy corporations and individuals, and took all the burden from them, but the war taxes on clothing, like the poor, we have always with us. Other taxes were given up when our interest debt of more than $2,000,000,000 was staring us in the face and demanding from the government more than $110,000,000 annually to meet its interest. With these facts before their eyes they made haste to roll all the burdens of taxation off the shoulders of the wealthy and-lay them upon the shoulders of those who could only pay as they procured the means by their daily toil. Could not that $127,000,000 contributed by the manufacturers from the rich bounties which the government had given have been retained until the war debt was paid? Could not the $72,000,000 from incomes have been held for a few years longer? Could not the tax on the receipts of the wealthy corporations have been continued for one decade?

Was the tax of 3 per cent, on a wool hat paid by the manufacturer more oppressive than the tax of 73 per cent, on both paid by the consumer? Was the tax of 3 per cent, on women’s and children’s clothing paid by the manufacturer more oppressive than the tax of 82 per cent, on both foreign and domestic goods of the same kind paid by the consumer? Was a tax of 3 per cent, on railroad companies, banking companies, insurance companies, express and telegraph companies, more oppressive than an 88 per cent, tax on woolen shawls? Was a 3 per cent, tax on incomes more oppressive than an 80 per cent, tax on a woolen shirt? The party then in power certainly thought so, for the taxes on wealth are gone, but the war tax on clothing, on food, on the implements of labor still remain with us, and the war against our prosperity, our labor and our commerce is still being vigorously prosecuted—a war that, is exhausting in its destructive invasions on labor, whether it is employed in agriculture, manufactures, commerce or mining. The gentlemen who represent the minority of the committee on ways and means boast that they have reduced taxation $360,000,000. They point with pride to the splendid’column which they have erected, but that column has no stone in it to tell of their devotion to the masses who live by daily toil. In 1883 they finished this magnificent shaft, which they have been for years erecting, and crowned it with the last stone by repealing the internal tax on playing cards and putting a 20 per cent, tax on the Bible.