A Concession To Justice

Most of the great metropohtan dailies of the country condemn the proposition to tax incomes. They charactenze such a tax as an odious, inquisitorial, monarchial, unpopular, war tax, and predict all sorts of calamities to the democratie party if it does not at once abandon its purpose to tax incomes. The reasons for this are not far to seek. The wealth of the country has always been opposed to any system of taxation which compelled it to bear ts due share ot the burdens of government, and it was to be expected hat the proposhion to 'tax incomes would be assailed by the plutócrata j and those who echo their sentiments. It is not claimed, however, that the income tax will work injustice to any, but that it is odious and difficult to coüect. But it is not more odious than any other tax that enlightens the taxpayer as to the amount he pays, and wherein is it more inquisitorial than the internal revenue system, the repons of commercial agencies, or even the tariff tax? As to the charge that it is a war tax, it may be retorted that the entire revenue from this source togetherwith a largeadditional amount will be needed to meet expenditures incurred on account of war. In any case is it not more just to lay a two per cent. tax on the surplus of the wealthy than to lay a tax of from fifty to one hundred per cent. on the necessaries of the poor? As to the charge that it is a monarchial tax, it may be asked what other system of taxation is there that is not resortad to by monarchial governments when the need of revenue is pressing? If it is an objection to this tax that monarchial governments sometimes resort to it, the objection is equally applicable to other methods of taxation. That the tax is unpopular in the numerical sense is untrue. With a voting population of more than 12,000,000, this tax will not touch to exceed 85,000 or 100,000 of the number, and the remainder will not even know of its existence unless it be through the lessening of -their own heavy burden of tax. That the proposition to tax income will be unpopular with the masses, therefore, when it comes to be clearly understood is impossible. The best system of taxation is that which is most just, and no one claims that there is any injustice in the proposition to tax incomes above a certain amount. The arguments in favor of an income tax are unanswerable. It is a tax which rests upon those who are best able to bear it, and henee is a burden to none and relieves many. It takes cognizance oí the varying abilities of persons to bear the burdens of government, and dernands of the wealthy, on aecount of the greater measure of governmental protection reeeived, the payment of a larger share of tax. Such a tax is far more equitable than one laid upon the necessaries of life, for by the latter the poor are compelled a pay a far larger proportinate amount of their income for the support of government than are the rich. Then again, many of the collosal fortunes of this country have been built up, in a degree at least, by the direct benefits of the protective system, which is but another name of public taxation for private advantage. It is high time, therefore, that the posessors of these great fortunes be compelled to bear their share of the public burdens in return for the special privilages conferred on them by the government. The income tax is equitable and just and should become law, the money power to the contrary notwithstanding. There isn't a mili or factory in the county that would raise wages if the tariff were doubled, nor one that need cut wages if it were quartered.