TAXING THE CHURCHES.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume II, Issue 64, 18 July 1874, Page 14

TAXING THE CHURCHES.

Extbacts from the speech ot Hon. P. A. Collins, before the ComMitte of the Massachusetts Legislature on " Just and Eaual Taxation :—: — * m ,!' Ifc i 8 officiull y reported that there is some 48,000,000do!s., worlh ot Church and other property devoted to religious, charitable, scientific and educational uses in the Commonwealth at present exempt under the law; and it is estimated that this exempted property, if taxed, would yield some 543,000d01s annually. This sum Ijoks large, but distributed among the countries, cities and towns, with a share to the btate, I fancy it would not much affect the rate of taxation. It would give the tax gatherers a larger field to work in, extend taxation over a wider area, and that is all. It would take a few less cents or dollars out of one pocket, and a few more dollars and cents out of another— the same men in either case would bear the burdens of Government, and pny the bills. If you have a million dollars to raise xn a given community by taxation, you may tax the property that you tax to-day, you way tax everything in the shape of property, visible or invisible ; in the former case the aggregate of property taxed will be small, but the rate of taxation will be high ; in the latter case the amount of property will be large and the rate low. What difference will it make P Will there be any more or any less property ; or will you raise or need any more or less revenue ? Double the valuation of all the property in the State to-day, and reduce the rate of taxation one-half— will you cheat any man into the belief that the people are twice as rich and only half as heavily taxed as before? You cannot make property by a stroke of the pen. But it is said that such an argument as this is a fallacy, because, after all, there are some people in our midst who pay taxes and who do not believe in churches! or in these other institutions. To show the number of such persons, attention has been called to the number of churches and their seating capacity. It v said that in 1870 there were in Mussachusetts 1764 churches, containing 882,000 seats, and one petitioner triumphantly remarked that many of those churches were not half filled during services. Well, I don't know what churches he refers to. He certainly eanuot be acquainted with mine. I can bring him to churches wuhin whose walls three times or more on every Sunday more people worship than can find seats. No Catholic church in this Commonwealth is half large enough to hold the people who worship in it. The number of seats v churches by no means represents the number of believers. The number of seats is four-sevenths of our population. While some churches may have empty seats at their single Sunday service, others are crowded twice nnd thrice and four times. Moreover the necessities of modern civilisation compel the employment on Sunday of a great number of our population. Others who profess reli ion do not ot cannot attend services. Add to these the aged, the infirm, and those of tender years who occupy no seats in the churches, and you mate «p nearly the whole inhabitants of the State. Tax-pavers and the supporters of churches and institutions which I have named n™ D - f m] ¥ a f- BaChußettß '. Th «P le » "that this exemption is an oppression of unbelievers plea for justice to infidels. How many Xfrt,! aY6 9 We wu re? . What P ro Perty do they own? What taxes do they pay? Wherein are they injured by the law as it stands? f«™ ProPer°."eßfP ro P er °." eBfi onß, but you will have no answer for «horn. The movement is avowed to be ar. infidel movement ; another phase of which one of the speakers called "The conflict between femSSl* tJ? # , tWee " J th ? ol °Bical8 ical f y™»y and Republican equahty. The Church stands in the way of those gentlemen. In their opinion churches are a nuisance. The true doctrine is •• Liberty equality frate. nity." Their ideas sometimes get a free range, become chrTstahzed into acts, end Paris makes a bonfire, in the light of which these zealous patriots send a few score of useless churchmen into etermty, and fraternally sack the city to emphasise tbeii- doctrines. Wheresoever you find them, and under whatsoever name, you will find disturbers, however small their numbers. Thus far in Ameri a they have done but little open violence. In New York the International has not been a success, because the police and m.litary are strong. fl [T • re ' lan.1 an . elsewhere, they have done what they have been able to do m the direction of disorder. They are the enemy of social order and religion in every form. Do you wonder that they Z^-rp^ !! yy ° U *° ta , ke S de P arfu ™ i* State policy in their direction ? They do not atk all they want, but they ask all they th.nk they can get. If they thought your temper would go the length of burning the churches aud making religion an outlaw, they would not hesitate to ask for it. I have .said that these « freethinker! » have been reinforced by others who profess to be Christians. One of these Christians, m response to a question from a member of the Committee, boldly answered that the common school is a greater conservator of moral, than the Church-thafc education without religion mikes a better citizen than religion without education. Hence he would foster the common school and discourage the Church. I leave the docSeSwst tbiS C ° mmittee t(> What W » d ° f <***» This is a movement for "equality." Mr Chairman, we often hear Sji^XfT?, On thafe W ° l ' d -, We are told th "«t^ constitution declares that ''all men are born free and equal. If they are, how lew remain so! lhoreisno such thing on thid earth as perfect equality in these things. Equuliiy i 8i 8 the dream of the socialist-and it is only a dream. But these men do not go the full length of their doctrine m taxation. They do not propose to disturb the exemption of cattle, horses, sheep and swine under a certain age, the property to the amountofsoodolß.of an unmarried female, the property of a female minor to the amount of lOOOdols., income to tha amount of 2000dols household furniture wearing apparel, mechanics' tools and farming utensils. Why not? Are these things not property? If thesf gentlemen aw to give us "just and equal » taxation, let us have it in Slfj «™ 7T & U r D at Pf/^P 18 of can any of it escape ? Why spare the scant earnings of the poor, the small patrimony of the orphan, the sewing machine of the seamstress, the tools or utensils of the workmgmen ? If they can't afford to pay taxes for their property the proper thing w to divide it around among the good people who

love "liberty, equality and fraternity." Make no exemptions ; allow the assessor no discretion. Tax property whereever you can find it regardless of the means of its owner, or the purpose to which it is devoted. Push the idea of the petitioners to its logical conclusion "But, Mr Chairman, the State will gain nothing by a change." I* will lose much. Suppose taxation of these classes of property would yield 543,000 dollars ft year. I can count in this vicinity institutions owned and managed by Catholics, the existence of which saves that amount to the public. Suppose we bad no house of the Angel Guardian, no home for destitute Catholic Children, no Carney Hospital, no House of the Good Shepherd, none of the score or so of other Catholic institutions I could name, the care of the inmates of these institutions would be thrown on the State— and you can calculate the cost. The rev. gentleman who preceded me gave you the details of these institutions. Knowing what it costs to build and keep these institutions annually, now multiply by three and you havo the cost of runnine them by the State. The State cannot afford to cripple these institutions. Moreover they do what no State Institutions can do —what no institution managed by the State or any county or city in it has yet done : they reform those whom they profess to reform. Let them alone, and they will savo the public more than all this 48 000 000 dollars worth of property will yield in taxes ; besides saving many a life, and leading many an erring one, who might otherwise be lost, into the right path. '

' Do no* tax them for the good they do. These institutions were founded, and have since been supposed by the contributions of the public spirited and the charitable, and it is the duty of the government to foster and encourage, and not to crush them. They have cost the State nothing. How much they have saved it can scarcely be measured. These institutions and the churches have been erected under an implied promise from the State that they should be free from taxation. These structures contribute to the beauty of every town and tillage in the State, and enhance the value of property around them. They are a source of no income to their supportsrs. They are erected and maintained for the moral good they do to individuals and to the State. They are a kind of property that no civilized country has yet made taxable. Is Massachusetts to muke the innovation ? Then will the shock be rude. Wisely and well the pioneers of this State saw the good that churches and private charities could do and encouraged their establishment and growth, not only by exempting their property from taxation, but by grants from the Treasury in many instances. Wiaely and well, to the glory of the Commonwealth and the benefit of ir 8 people, that policy of encouragement has been maintained to this hour. That policy has been as economical as it has been generous. Catholics can bear as muoh as their neighbors— they have borne more in the past, and even now bear more,— but they join with other denominations in the State, with other men whose generous hands have helped the poor and soothed the suffering, and led the erring to better ways j they join to-day vith the vast majority of the citizens of Massachusetts, in asking you to stand between them and a false economy dictated by men who either wiil not or cannot see the good fruits of generous and Christian policy.