provision to impose a tax on persons " with a
political view," with the broad scope that
those words would allow to men in the Legis-
lature, who may have some object to subserve,
there might be a question whether it would
not allow the imposition of a poll tax, in re-
lation to the qualifications of voters, for the
political view of controlling votes, or deciding
who shall vote. The very clause that is al-
ready in this article, and which no one pro-
poses to touch, opens abroad field for action,
Now there is nothing in the substitute pro-
posed by my colleague that should startle the
people. And I much doubt whether the peo-
ple will so distrust this Convention as to ap-
prehend any danger from their action in this
respect, or will send men to .their future Leg-
islatures who will impose a poll tax as a
qualification for voting; and all that we have
heard here about imposing such a burden
upon the poor man, and restricting the right
of voting, it seems to me is uncalled for, when
we remember that we have already passed
upon an article which provides that every free
white male citizen shall have the right to vote.
Mr. BARRON. "Ought to have."
Mr. CUSHING. One of the gentleman (Mr.
Miller) who opposes this article, says that
"ought to" means "shall," and that has not
been contradicted on this floor.
Mr. SCHLEY. There seems to be in this
Convention a considerable confusion of ideas
upon this subject. Now let us understand
what it is we are talking about; and first, let
me ask, what Is a poll tax? If I have a cor-
rect apprehension of the general meaning of
the term, it means a capitation tax levied upon
the voters at the polls. That is one, and the
popular interpretation of that term; another
interpretation, and perhaps a more critical
one, is that it is a mere capitation tax Now
if the first interpretation be accepted as the
proper one, then a poll tax is clearly grievous
and oppressive. I shall never consent to a
tax upon the elective franchise, if the other
be the proper interpretation, then I think it
must strike every member here that, if not
necessarily so, it may be and must be, in
many instances, equally grievous and op-
pressive. And for that same reason I think
that all such taxes " ought to be abolished ;"
which I understand to mean a prohibition of
them.
Now the confusion of ideas to which I have
referred strikes me as occurring between either
of these interpretations, and the provision
contained in the latter part of this article, au-
thorizing the Legislature to "properly and
justly" impose taxes "on persons and prop-
erty with a political view." I apprehend that
the taxes on persons there referred to are not in
their nature in either acceptation of the term,
the popular or the critical one, a capitation tax,
or taxes on persons at the polls. But it may
refer to what we now have under the Federal
laws, taxes upon income; it may refer to taxes |
upon government or public officers. Taxes
purely personal and not laid upon the prop-
erty, are not necessarily capitation taxes, or
taxes levied at the polls.
Now believing that taxes by the poll, or
capitation taxes) are grievous and oppres-
' sive, I shall vote for retaining this article as
it is, and against the amendment proposed.
And believing also that the power granted to
the Legislature, in the succeeding portion of
the article, to levy personal taxes, will not
come atallin conflict with this prohibition re-
specting taxes by the poll, or capitation taxes,
1 see no necessity for altering it, and shall
vote for it as it is.
Mr. PUGH. As one who has repeatedly paid
a poll tax, I suppose I may be permitted lo
explain what I understand by the words
"poll tax." I understand the word "poll"
to be a very old word for "head ;" and a poll
tax is to all intents and purposes a capitation
tax. Now if I thought gentlemen from Bal-
timore city would have any difficulty in ex-
plaining to their constituents what was meant
by this term "poll tax," I should be in
favor of some explanation accompanying it
here. But I do not think they will have any
difficulty in so doing,
Mr. i. CUSHING. Did the gentleman allude to
me. as one who would have difficulty in. ex-
plaining ?
Mr. PUGH. No, sir; I alluded to no gen-
tleman in particular.
, Mr. CUSHING. I merely want to say this,
that if this Convention shall ignore the prin-
ciple "that the levying of taxes by the poll is
grievous and oppressive," my people will
think that they will not have they right to vote
without paying a tax.
Mr. PUGH. Then I think that the gentle-
man should go home to his constituents and
explain that it does not mean that. Thou-
sands of men have had poll taxes levied upon
them, have not paid, and yet have voted.
One serious objection I have always had to
the levying of a poll tax, as shown more par-
ticularly in 'Virginia, was that it was almost
utterly impossible to collect it of the very
parties to whom several of the gentlemen from
Baltimore seem to think it refers. A man
. who has nothing to pay with does not pay a
poll tax or any other lax; and yet he votes
unless he is otherwise disqualified from voting.
I have repeatedly paid a poll tax in Virginia,
and I have voted side by side with dozens of
, men who never paid a poll tax or any other
tax.
Now there is nothing whatever in this ar-
ticle or any other requiring that a man shall
pay a poll tax or any other tax in order to
entitle him to the right of suffrage; and if the
Legislature should hereafter provide that no
man shall vote unless he pays some tax», wheth-
er that Legislature designate that tax as a poll
tax or any other tax, that will not deprive
him of the right of suffrage. |
