The Workingman's Protest Against Seattle's 'Class Tax'

To the Editor—Allow me, in a few words, to criticize Ordinance No. 95 of the city of Seattle, which, without any further preliminaries, I unhesitatingly pronounce a piece of high-handed imposition and injustice upon certain classes of our citizens. These are comparatively poor and hardworking men who perform all the drudgery of the city, exposing themselves to all inclemencies of the seasons, and who have a hard enough time to make a living for themselves and families without being subjected to such invidious, unjust, and class burdens which this ordinance imposes on them. It is the legislation of wealth against labor, and none but abject slaves will willingly submit to it. The only source from which revenues for the support of government can justly come is through a direct tax on the wealth of the people. But Ordinance No. 95, so far as it goes, exempts wealth from taxation and imposes it on labor. To carry out the principle of license, why not impose it on the Druggist, the Butcher, the Grocer, the Hardware merchant, the Dry Goods merchant, and every other occupation as well? Why single out the comparatively poor and hardworking men and impose burdens on them who have already more than they can conveniently carry? It seems to me this ordinance was passed with but very little consideration; and the sober second thought of the city fathers ought to lead them to its immediate repeal. — F. H. M.