GOOD OLD DAYS.

Hokitika Guardian, 4 March 1922, Page 4

GOOD OLD DAYS.

HARSH TAXES AND WOEFUL TAXPAYERS.

(By Eric F. in Sydney paper). The taxpayer of to-day scowls over the printed demands of the relentless taxgatherer, and mutters something or <il (er about “the good days.’ No doubt our grandparents did the same thing, and their grandfathers before them ,especially those ancestors of ours who paid taxes in “the good old days ’ of tho Eighteenth century when the odious taxgalherers of England personally inspected the rooms of every house to ascertain the number of hearthstones, there being a tax levied on every fireplace in a house. This obnoxious visit made the tax doubly odious until finally a revolting caused it to he abolished ns a thing of intolerance. But soon after this storm had blown over a tax of two shillings was levied on every inhabited dwelling, and a. house having 10 windows m uß l P a y an additional four shillings; while from those houses having 30 or more windows the State revenue gained 20 shillings. As tne number of the windows of a house can be counted fr°ni tlie exterior of a dwelling, the taxgatherer’s annual visit was not so offensive as in the days when he visited every fireplace.

The chief objection to this taxing of windows was its inequality. A house in a country town secured at a low rental might have more windows than a house in London for which a higher rent was paid. The inhabitant of tho country home was likely to be a much poorer tenant than that of tlte latter, and yet he was forced to contribute more to the support of the State. In those days the tenant of a house paid the tax. A Digger once asked in an English village why the windows of many of the old houses were so small. His Englnish guide explained that in “the good old days” windows were also taxed according to their size, the larger the windows the higher the tax. The poor man and the miser were easily traced by their house windows, which the rich man who wished to make an outward show of his wealth, told the story of his prosperity by looking out on the world through broad window panes, it was natural that burdened taxpayers should ever be seeking a loophole to evade the oppressive demands of the gatherer of taxes. An instance of this is responsible for the present-day size of our house brick which measures 9in. x 41 x. 90J.in

In the 18th century house bricks were taxed by quantity. In those days it was a much smaller article than the brick of to-day, but on its being taxed so much per thousand, its dimensions were so Enormously enlarged that the builder used hundreds instead of thousands of bricks in the erection of a moderate-sized house. Finally a compromise wag made by the outraged taxgatherers and the suffering taxpayer when the brick was reduced to its pre-

sent-day size. Probably very few Aus- j tralians are aware that even to this j day certain old-time taxes are still in j force in England, The employer of the j coachman who adorns his livery with a cockade must pay an annual tax for this little piece of showiness, and h e who would blazon a coat of arms on j hig carriage or motor car must also pay ( for the privilege. And now as we tackle our taxation papers, ma y we find a slight solace in the fact that we hve in the 20tli and not the 18th cen- j tiny. i