though I have thought ever since that unless
the State enforced it upon others, which it did
cot, it still owed me the fifty dollars I paid
at that time; for with the exception of a
few men, who, like Gov. Pratt and some
others, paid the full tax until the law was
repealed, all the rest of the people of the
State failed to pay the tax.
Now I am for removing every objection, by
conferring upon the General Assembly the
clear and constitutional right to levy an in-
come tax, and the suggestions which come
from my friend from Cecil (Mr. Scott) meets
that view precisely. His idea is that those
who enjoy the protection of the government
should contribute to its support. They may
be making $3,000, $4,000 or $5,000 a year,
in the way of salary. Upon what? Not upon
any real and personal property that can be
found and taxed. Yet there are many men
who own a few acres of land which may be
worth $3,000 or $4,000, the tax upon which
may be $50. Some man may own an acre
of land only, and may have a wife and chil-
dren to support by the proceeds of his daily
labor, and may find it exceedingly difficult
at the end of the year to pay the doctor's
bills for his family, and the necessary ex-
penses of clothing them, and have a pittance
left to pay his State and county tax. And
will you tell me that the man whose abilities
can command a salary of from $1,000 to
$5,000 a year, but who does not choose to
invest his money in any estate that the State
can reach, shall be allowed to go scot free?
What is his capital in business? His talents,
his character and his industry, and upon
those he trades. Where? Here in this State,
where he enjoys the protection of our laws,
and where if he is injured in any way our
State must pay the expenses of courts and
juries to redress his injuries. And yet he is
to be here, enjoying the full protection of
our laws and our government, for whose
expenses others are to be taxed, and is to
contribute nothing to the support of that
government, because he does not own real or
personal estate that can be reached by the
assessor and tax gatherer. Is that just?—
Does not the contribution to the support of
the government, according to a man's real
ability to make that contribution, constitute
the true relation of the citizen to the State,
and the true basis of taxation? And should
a man who invests what little money he may
have in an acre of land in the county, or in
a house in the city, that he may have a home-
stead for his wife and children, be compelled
to pay a tax upon it; and others who have
their capital to trade upon, while this man's
capital is bait the sinews of his body and the
toil of his hands, others who are blessed by
heaven with higher capacities and qualifica-
tions, and can command higher wages, per-
haps live far easier lives, are to enjoy every
protection of the government that this labor- |
ing man enjoys, and yet contribute nothing
to the support of that government? I do not
think that is in accordance with any princi-
ples of equity and justice, or of sound policy
in the organization of any government.
Now I maintain that it is the duty of this
Convention to confer upon the General As-
sembly full power of taxation. I have no
idea that any man who desires the protection
of the State will hesitate a moment to pay a
email part of his salary in the shape of a
proper tax for the support of the government.
And I maintain that it is the duty of this
Convention to confer upon the General As-
sembly a power of taxation at least equal to
and concurrent with that possessed by the
Congress of the United States. And I have
drawn up a provision to that effect, which at
the proper time I desire to offer by way of
amendment, and which I will read now as a
part of my argument, and which is framed
in accordance with the views I have had the
honor to submit to the Convention. It is in
these words:
"Article 14, The General Assembly shall
have power to lay and collect taxes for the
defence of the State, and the support of the
government thereof, and for purposes of edu-
cation; also to lay any imposts or duties on
imports or exports which may be absolutely
necessary for the execution of the State In-
spection' Laws; and also such fines, duties
or taxes as they may deem expedient and
proper for the good government and benefit
of the community."
And I beg leave to read from the Consti-
tution of the United States the terms of the
grant of power to the federal Congress, to
show that I have embodied in this article,
which I shall offer as an amendment, those
subjects of State taxation about which there
can be no possibility of dispute; for there is
a restriction, to which the States agreed, in
the Constitution of the United States upon
subjects of State taxation. The very first
clause of the eighth section of the enumera-
tion of the powers of Congress, is in these
words:
'.Congress shall have power to levy and
collect taxes, duties, imports and excises, to
pay the debts and provide for the common
defence and general welfare of the United
States, but. all duties and imposts shall be
uniform throughout the United States."
Then in the second clause of section ten
will be found the restriction on the States :
"No State shall, without the consent of
Congress, lay any imposts or duties on im-
ports or exports, except what may be abso-
lutely necessary for executing its inspection
laws."
1 propose to make this article correspond
precisely with the Constitution of the United
States, giving concurrent power to the Gen-
eral Assembly with that possessed by the
Congress of the United States. And whenever |
