contribute his proportion of public taxes for
the support of Government, according to his
actual worth in real or personal property."
Now there is a restriction which will go
far to restrict the power of the Legislature
upon the subject of taxation. And what is
tire concluding proposition ?
"Yet fines, duties or taxes may properly
and justly be imposed or laid on persons or
property, with a political view, for the good
government and benefit of the communi-
ty."
That concluding provision contains terms
so broad and inconclusive and vague that
there will very likely be a great deal of liti-
gation if the action of the Legislature should
happen to pass out of the usual routine of
taxation.
Mr. PUGH. I would call the attention of
the gentleman to the fact that the words
' 'with a political view, ' ' are proposed to be
stricken out by the amendment.
Mr. JONES, of Somerset. I think they bet-
ter be stricken out, for they amount to noth-
ing here, tor the real object and meaning is
that the tax shall be "for the good govern-
ment and benefit of the community."
Now it occurs to me that especially in the
condition in which we are now placed, with
the evident necessity that there is for taxes
to be derived from every proper source of
income and revenue upon which the State
can rely properly in the exercise of all the
proper powers of government in a civilized
and Christian land—it seems to me that
the power of the General Assembly to lay
and collect taxes should be very broad
and unrestricted. Now I submit that if the
power of taxation, conferred by the States,
through the Constitution of the United States,
upon the Federal Congress, to be exercised
upon the individual citizens of every State
throughout the country—and which is broad
and unlimited, being concurrent with that
of many of the States—1 submit that the
power of taxation to be conferred by this
Convention upon the General Assembly of
Maryland ought to be at least as broad as
the power of taxation conferred upon the
Congress of the United States. I think that
is a reasonable proposition, and that there
need be no fear that any General Assembly
of Maryland, in considering upon and adopt-
ing the proper subjects of taxation to raise
the necessary revenue for the support of the
Government, the common defence of the
State, and purposes of education, will go be-
yond the usual and proper sources of taxa-
tion which may be found expedient by the
experience of this State.
Now upon contingencies which arose upon
former occasions, the General Assembly die
attempt to raise revenue from some sources of
taxation which were unusual in the history of
this State, which at the time were considered
as contravening the provision of the Consti- |
tution which declared that taxes should be
laid upon property, and that a man should
contribute to the support of the Government
according to his actual worth in real and per-
sonal property. Hence it was that when the
law of 1841, chapter 325, called the income
tax, was passed, assessing tax of 2 1/2 per
cent. upon all salaries, professional incomes,
and profits arising from all professions and
employments, amounting to more than $500,
it was very generally considered to be oner-
ous and oppressive, as very objectionable
and very unusual, and by many lawyers that
law was denounced as conflicting with that
very clause of the Constitution, which we
now have under consideration, that taxes
should be upon persona in proportion to
their actual worth in real and personal prop-
erty. That act provided for the appoint-
ment of assessors, that every man's income
should be assessed 2 1/2 per cent.; and collec-
tors were to he appointed, and the tax was
to be collected and paid into the State Trea-
sury. It was explained by the act of 1842, ch.
294, that the incomes to be taxed were those of
lawyers, physicians, professors and teachers
of colleges and academies, all officers of the
State, and all salaries received by any per-
son in the employment of any person, pri-
vate association, firm or company, amount-
ing to $300, should be assessed 2 1/2 per cent.
And I believe that no law ever passed in
this State, imposing any sort of tax for
revenue, ever so signally failed of execution
as this income tax law of 1841. It was de-
nounced from the beginning as unusual and
unconstitutional and it was very generally
disregarded. In very many counties nobody
could be found who would consent to be as-
sessor. In some of the counties the County
Commissioners would not appoint assessors,
and the law was so amended as to give the
Governor the power to appoint. But even
then the law could not be enforced, except
on those very patriotic individuals who did
not object to the payment of the tax, and
those gentlemen who were receiving salaries
from the State, from which the tax could be
deducted. I was absent from my county
when the law was passed, when the assess-
ment was made, and when the whole thing
went into operation. I was absent upon
duty, out of the State in fact. When I re-
turned, some time during the summer of
1843, the collector called upon me and pre-
sented a bill of income tax for me to pay. Now
I had never been asked a single question
about my income; I had never even seen the
assesor. I found that the assessor had esti-
mated my professional income from the prac-
tice of law—and by the by I had for three
years scarcely been in the county, but had
been elsewhere, and my professional incomes
had almost entirely fallen off—the assessor
had estimated my income at three times
what it actually was. But I paid the tax, |
