The Record

Iu Lia volunteor inaugural addrosa deivered beforatli legislatura, ia Jauuary .855, Gov. Bixgiiam said : " I au happy to congratúlate you on your rnoeting, upoa tha highly proaperous and favorable condition of the State." So it seema the suooessive Demooratio administration had not ruined the pros)erity of the State but had raised it to a 1 highly prosperous" condition : Again, the Governor said; " There had been aooumulated in the State Treaaury, and was on hand on the nrst day of December laat, 8552,000,08." An important faot, wheu wa coasider hat the Detroit Alcertiasr triumphautly )roclaimed in 1842, when Woodbridge nd Reform were ousted, that the Damooacy had no easy taak oa hand, that in asuming the goverument, " they would nd an ciapty treasury and a ruinad credt." And again the Gorernor aid : liTh state is peiifboilt fuke _ emaraisnunt in her financial conditiou, aid t is believed tLat by a proper system of eonomy, no resort to direct taxation will Ie ler.essary to meet tht ordinary expense of gotiernment.'1 How different a picture froni that preonted by Gjv. Bahky on his acoession o power in January, 1812, Thcn tha Stato debt was onerous and burdonsome, he specific taxes were light, ths out-gong Whig party rejoioed that tha treasuy was inipoverished, and tha credit of he Stato ruiiw.l, and tharc was ao romedy but in direct taxation. But, Gov. Bi.nqham is not tho only witneas on the stand. Auditor Generaj Jones in hia firat annual report, dated December 10, 1855, after he had had a year of official service, and must bo supposed o have spoken from tho book, said : " The large surplus in the treasury, with tho ineome from specific taxe3. and the sales of Stste lands, it is bolieved, will be found sufficieht to defray the ordinanj expenses of tha govarnment, and msnt promptly the inlerett on tht public debt, AND 80 MOCH OF THS PRINCIPAL AS MAÏURBS PREVIOÜS TO 1860." And tbere is another witness still. - State Treasurer Holmes in his annual report dated Dac. 31st, 1855, proinises that with the accumulated fund,thefunds to accrue from the sales of the pubüo ands, and from the specific taxea, " The State may satkly kely r.pon a 'und scfficient to meet promptly tu int.prnst, and thn nrinóinal on tha State diibt a maturity, and at the snins time find liersulf pnssessed of ample rksouhces to carry out the liberal plans already Vud for promoting and fostoriny popular tditcation and complêting and putting into successful operrtion our several State instituticns." Ttan wa tli3 solonsa olSiial proniisos, what are the performances ? The Governor, the Auditor, and the Treasuror, charge no profiigaoy upon their predecessors ; thay all acknowledge the prosperoua condition of the State, they all aeknowledge the large aooumulated fund and they all promisa immuuity frova direct taxation, for ny purposo, up to the year 1860. Have these promises been performed ? We aaswer, NO ! The speciíic tazos have gone ou increasing, aud direct taxation, withoat which 'f the ordiuary expsnsos of the government1' wore to bo paid; the " interest on the public debt" to be promptly raet, with " so much of the principal as matures previous to 1860," "popular education fostered" and tho " State institutions oomplcted and put into saoosssful operatioti," - has already amounted in the aggregats to $477,130; bosides whichthe Biugham- VV isner administration have exhausted thesurplus of $552,000, borrowcd $50,000 meet the current expenses of tho Lovernmont. $216,000 to pay on the public debt and $100,000 to repair the Saut Canal. This performance with a vengeaaco, Oiie whieh tax-payers, unlcss blindcd by party, would rebuka in thundering tonea. tío much for fact, and we will conolude by comparing the taxation of five yoars of Kepublioan rule withthe last five years of Democratie rule. On page 7 of our !'statistoal" neighbors' tract wc fiad atablo of the direct State taxes levied for the ten years beginuing with 1850, and a boast that the great iucrease of specific taxes prove tho inercasing wealth of the State. This may bo, but somo more clcar-honded financi'jp isigtt woll ask why tho incroase of direct taxation fihould keep pace witli the increase of specific taxes, and mildly insinúate that it wasnot so when Joun S. Barrï and his Ddinocratio successors managcd the affairs of Stato. Lot us comparo: DEMOCRAT1C TEUIOD. Direct Taz Spocific Tax. 1850 113,768 24,404,20 1S5L 100,000 27,717,80 1852 110,000 85,854,71 1853 10,000 101,831,15 1854. 30,000 118,318,95 $309,763 $352,629,31 KEl'UBLlCAN' I'XKIOD. Direct Tas Spocifio Tax 1855 40,000 110,339,13 1856 65,000 127,977,21 1857 85,065 131,047,69 1858 85,065 166,261,44 1850 202,000 146,637,05 6 177.13 J $391832,52 Duriug the last fireyoars of Democratie rulo a total annual tax wa collectcd, both direct and spoaific, of $722,397,31, or an aAerage annual tas of 3144,179,46, and a hÊmcé M ty't & trxttur of 5j2j0CM_.08. fivo jrtBti ot i llcpublican rule they have collocted a tCtal tas of $1,163,892.52, or an avorago annual tax of $233,778,50, have impovcrished the treasury, aud borrowcd 8336,090. And sush is the roaord, ar.d suoh thü Republioan esoaomy and pr)tsction promkad tho tax-pavers in the future. Faota aro stubborn thiügs, nnd the tax-paying voters would do woll to pondsr tho "statistics."