“When we consider only the revenues actually received by the government the conclusion inevitably |THE PROPORTIONS OF INDIRECT TAXES.| reached is that the wealthy class pays less than one-tenth of the indirect taxes, the well-to-do class less than one-quarter and the relatively poorer classes more than two-thirds. The table summing up the incidence of these taxes in 1890 would stand as follows:

Class of Incomes. Total
Incomes in Dollars.		 Total
Property in Dollars.		 National
Taxes in Dollars.		 Taxation to
Income. Property.
$5,000 and over 3,110,000,000 35,500,000,000 35,000,000 .01 .001
$5,000 to $1,200 2,890,000,000 21,500,000,000 85,000,000 .03 .004
Under $1,200 4,800,000,000 9,000,000,000 260,000,000 .05 .028

The above table of indirect taxes indicates that the poorer classes (including the homeless and landless) which had only little over $9,000,000,000 worth of the aggregate wealth, paid more than twice as much of these taxes as did the well-to-do and the wealthy classes taken together. Dr. Spahr, therefore, adds:

“In the domain of direct taxation such injustice would not be tolerated one month, |THE INDIRECT TAXES PAID.| but in the domain of indirect taxation it is endured year after year.”[[167]] So that, enduring similar injustice seven years—from 1891 to 1897 inclusive, the increased number of families paid the totals of indirect taxes approximately as follows:

Classes of Families.Number.Totals of Property.Taxes Paid.
Families worth $5,000 and over1,695,117$79,825,000,000$ 840,000,000
Families worth under $5,00012,755,3107,000,000,0001,479,179,059

The fact that the total revenue, including customs, etc., received by the government in the seven years amounted to $2,319,179,059,[[168]] indicates, that while the population has increased, the indirect taxes seem to have decreased by $340,820,941 below |THE TAXATION MOST UNJUST TO THE POOR.| the amount which would be required by the rates paid in 1890. This diminution would average about $48,688,705 in each successive year, and may be due to the passage of the Wilson Bill. Although Dr. Spahr says that this bill has not materially changed the situation, because the poorer classes, as we see, have paid $639,179,057 more for the support of the government than did the well-to-do and the wealthy classes together. He therefore adds that “our system of national taxation remains in proportion to its weight the most unjust to poorer classes of any now tolerated in any popularly governed country.”[[169]] Of course, “the situation was the most unjust,” when the families worth $5,000 and under were smaller in numbers and when they owned over $9,000,000,000 worth of collective wealth. But the injustice now surpasses all degrees of comparison, because these families increased by about 1,565,158, even without counting the families worth $5,000 and over whose wealth must have been reduced below the worth of $5,000.

As to the distribution of local taxes in the year 1890, these were paid as follows:

Families with incomes of $5,000 and over$220,000,000
Families with incomes of $5,000 to $1,200170,000,000
Families with incomes of under $1,200125,000,000[[170]]

From this table it is clear that the local taxation is not so unjustly imposed upon the poorer families as the indirect taxation |LOCAL TAXATION IS LESS UNJUST.| is.[[171]] Yet judging from the facts that the above table represents gross incomes, and that the poorer classes lose all the wealth they produce in favor of monopolies and combinations, the injustice against these classes cannot again be regarded other than a profound injustice. For, having been paid seven years—from 1891 to 1897 inclusive—these taxes amount to as follows:

Classes of Families.Number of Families.Totals of Property in Dollars.Taxes Paid in Dollars.
Families worth $5,000 and over1,695,117$ 79,825,000,0002,615,963,952
Families worth under $5,00012,755,3107,000,000,000875,000,000