INDIRECT TAXATION. l6l 



accompanied by his own opinions, all in most pronounced 

 opposition to indirect taxation. He tells of how at one 

 time, in the days of the Roman Empire, *' duties on im- 

 ports and exports, on the passage of country produce 

 into towns and cities, on the passage of rivers, on sales 

 by auction, on almost every kind of property in motion, 

 mark the later portion of the history of the republic, and 

 the whole of that of the empire. Slaves could not change 

 masters, nor could property change hands by legacy or 

 donation, without payment of a tax. The raising of 

 cattle and the consumption of salt were privileges to be 

 paid for to the state. The consumer of water, and he 

 who needed to avoid it, alike were taxed. Nothing was 

 so trivial in appearance as to warrant its escape from 

 the hands of the tax-gatherer, provided only that it 

 promised to add to a revenue required for the main- 

 tenance of a system under which labor and land declined 

 in value and slavery took the place of freedom." 



Of Turkey he said : " Taxation there has no reference 

 whatever to the value of the land, but only to the ability 

 of the collector and his agents to squeeze from its culti- 

 vator the largest share of its products." 



Thus also of the United States : " The government of 

 the United States has, throughout most of its existence, 

 been misled by the erroneous idea that indirect taxation 

 was the legitimate mode of raising the public revenue. 

 . . . What has been the effect of this policy is seen in 

 the facts already stated in relation to the comparative 

 prices of agricultural products they need to sell and those 

 metallic ones they require to purchase — the experience 

 of forty years having exhibited a steady and regular 

 increase in the quantity of wheat, flour, rice, tobacco, 

 and cotton required to be given in exchange for smaller 



