Funding for the digitization of this title was provided by the R.J. Taylor, Jr. Foundation in partnership with the Atlanta History Center.
About Weekly constitutionalist. (Augusta, Ga.) 185?-1877 | View Entire Issue (May 16, 1866)
BY STOCKTON k CO, OUR TERMS. Tbi* following are the rates of Subscription and Ad vertising in the Constitutionalist : Wseklt—3 Months $ 75 6 Months 1 50 TERMS FOR ADVERTISEMENTS: per Square for Ist insertion, and 75 cents for each additional time. Special Notices will be charged 25 per cent, on the above rates. [From the Richmond Whig. The Burning of Columbia. There is a controversy between General Slier man and General Wade Hampton as to the re sponsibility for the burning; of Columbia. This controversy was initiated by General Sherman, who, in a letter written by him on the subject to Mr. Benjamin Rawles, of Columbia, denied his own responsibility for it, aud charged it upon General Hampton. The correspondence between General Sherman and Mr. Rawles re sulted from a petition of the latter to Congress for compensation for the destruction of ltis bouse by the Federal army. As soon as Gen eral Hampton saw this letter in the newspapers be wrote to Hon. Reverdy Johnson, Senator from Maryland, denying that any cotton was fired in Columbia by his order, or that the citi zens set fire to it, or that any cotton was on fire when the Federal troops entered the city. On the contrary, he alleges that he gave a positive order that no cotton should he burned; that not a hale was on fire when the Federal troops entered the city; that General Sherman prom ised protection to the city, “ and that, in spite of his solemn promise, he burned the city to the ground, deliberately, systematically, atro ciously.” General Hampton asks the appoint ment by Congress of a commission to investi gate and report upon the tacts of the case, and pledges himself to prove his allegations before “any honest tribunal.” When General Hamp ton’s letter was read in the Senate, Mr. Sher man, of Ohio, brother of General Sherman, professed much amazement and disgust at the audacity of “ this most impudent rebel” in writing such a letter, and spoke in slighting terms of him. Mr. Fessenden was opposed to receiving or considering the letter. Mr. Con ness was of the same opinion with Mr. Fessen den, and added that a man who would attempt to destroy the Government of the United States would certainly not hesitate to burn a city. General Hampton is as lofty and honorable a man, we will not say as any of the three Se nators who thus expressed themselves, for that might he scant praise, but as walks the earth. As for Mr. Conuess he would not dare, in or dinary times, to insinuate anything reflecting upon the distinguished gentleman whose char acter he now feels himself safe in impugning. He takes advantage of the present state of public affairs, and of his official position.' This is very brave and mauly!' It is, perhaps, natural that Senator Sherman, the brother of General Sherman, should evince sensibility, if not re sentment, in regard to any matter touching that distinguished officer’s reputation. But we were not prepared for the unseemly and puerile dis play he made. Here is a controversy as to a matter of fact between two officers of high rank, who made much reputation during the war. Both of them are esteemed men of high character and un impeachable honor. It is not necessary to be lieve that either would deliberately and know ingly make a false statement. Like all mortals they are bolh liable to mistake. One (General Sherman) charges upon the other (General Hampton) responsibility for the burning of a town during the late war. The latter denies it. Why should he uot deny it, if he is not guilty ? He goes farther and retorts the charge, and asks a committee of investigation, pledging himself to prove to the satisfaction of any “honest tribunal” that he is not guilty, and that General Sherman is. Has he not the right to do all this ? These gentry, who from their “bomb-proofs” assail him for it, will have to learn, aud the sooner they learn it the better, that though the Southern people were defeated in the late war, by mere dint of an overwhelm ing numerical superiority, (as five or six to one,) individual Southerners did not lose their man hood or their personal rights, and that success in that war did not give to mere individuals at the North any right to snub, sneer at, or insult individuals at the South, nor willthey be allow ed to do so with impunity. It will be better for them to be cautious and prudent, and avoid creating difficulties that may call for future set tlement. Insults rankle and are not readily forgotten. Mr. Conness was pleased to say shat “ a man who would attempt to destroy the Government of the United States would certainly not hesi tate to burn a city ” —meaning that General Hampton would commit any crime and make any false statement because he had been what is called “ a rebel.” If it were not contemptible, it would be amusing to see men without the spirit of hares ensconce themselves behind numbers and rail at individuals whom man to man they would not dare encounter. But, we would like to know at what time the use of the torch in war came to be Considered so great a crime that to he charged with it called for such indignant displays on the part of the friends of the person accused! The black ened ruins of fifty Southern towns and villages, and of thousands of Southern homesteads, wantonly committed to the flames,attest to this day the energy and zeal of Federal commanders n this line of service. Do these officers all stand disgraced in Northern estimation, as these senatorial demonstrations imply General yditrrnan would be if he had burnt Columbia ? ’Ve should like to know. If so, then what is to he said of the performances of that cockahoop trooper Sheridan in the Valley of Virginia, and of the chief under whose direct order he acted, in so desolating by fire that beautiful district “ that a crow flying over it would be compelled to carry his rations ?” The subject is a fruitful °ae, but for the present we forbear. (Fro.’.a the Richmond Enquirer. can advise no more humiliations. The Northern politicians fought us because they held that we were still States in the Union. We yielded to their view of the matter, and pro posed to act as such, when we are met with an interminable series of conditions precedent. In other words, they refuse to recognize our presence in the Union, after refusing to allow our departure. It is idle for us to pay price after price, for what they have never had a right to withhold, but which they have the power aud the will to deny after the price is paid, the same as before. If they are resolved to inflict thc-ir tyranny upon us, we can at least maintain °ur dignity and self-rc-speet; and these are worth more than our rights, for character is before interest. The reader doubtless remarked a passage of ineffable meanness, in the comments published yesterday, of Senator Sherman on the letter of Gen. Wade Hampton. Said he : He writes to this Senate that the State ot South Carolina is excluded from representation i ‘AUGUSTA, GA., WEDNESDAY MORNING, MAY 16, 1866. in this body. And why is she excluded ? Be cause they violated their oath, and have for yegrs been trying to get out of the Union, and now that they are beaten and defeated they whine like whipped curs to get back. The man Sherman knew that he was speak ing falsely when he said the Southern people were “ whining” to get back into the Union ; and when he compared them to “ curs,” it was but the snarl of the dog that represents Ohio in the Senate. The Southern people, when they yielded the fight, returned, like honest and honorable men—a character that Sherman does not know how to appreciate—to the duties of the Union, from which they had uot been al lowed to withdraw. One of these duties, as well as a right, was the election of representa tives to Congress—a duty which Mr. Lincoln was very apprehensive they might refuse to perform. For this loyal and honorable course they are villitied, as we have seen, by a mau who would not dare to speak as he did in the presence of a Southern representative or to the liice of a Southern gentleman, and who would sooner jump into a well than say it to Hampton. If Sherman does not want us in the Union, why did he not let us go ? Why did he scud so many to that fight from which he spared his own carcass, if he did not desire us in the sis terhood ? And if he did, why does he now rave against us like a virago, when we appear to take our places ? It is such creatures as he that are now exacting conditions of us for re cognition as members of the Union, after hav ing so recognized and proclaimed us on every battle-field from Gettysburg to the Rio Del Norte! If the powers that be are resolved to visit outrage upon us, let it, at least, be without our further sanction. Let us stand in our tracks, and upon our rights, and throw upon those who may deny them all the odium and infamy.— Such, we believe, is the temper of the Southern people at this time. We have followed the ig nis fatuus of reconstruction until we are weary of floundering in morass and mire. The repre sentation which would be accorded us even by those who would allow ns representation atali, is really no representation. The test oath makes of it a mere mockery; nay, worse, for it makes it misrepresentation. Think of Botts or Un derwood as a representative of Virginia! Infi nitely do we prefer none , to such as they. Then surely we have no need further to prostrate ourselves in the dust, in tedious and doubtful pursuit of a privilege like that! Let us look to our cornfields and tobacco patches and work shops, and leave the reconstructors to come to their senses. We have eaten our peek of dirt already. [From the Richmond Times. Profiting, no doubt, by .Usop’s account of the successful assault of a cowardly donkey upon a dying lion, certain Northern non-com batants have recently covered themselves with disgrace in their vain attempts to dishonor some of the most estimable and chivalrous sol diers of the late Confederate armies. The first shameful instance of this sort was the brutal insults offered to General Edward Johnson, when he was forced to appear as a witness be fore the “ military commission,” of which that heroic vandal and fugitive incendiary, Hunter, was President. Without the slightest provoca tion, and in the mere wantonness of secure ma lice, a few obscure Federal brigadiers yelped at that battle-scarred, fearless warrior, who treated his assailants with calm, imperturbable indiffer ence and contempt, and seemed not to hear even their impotent calumnies. The recent vituperation of that Chevalier Bayard of the South, Wade Hampton, by Senator Sherman, will place that individual in the eyes of liouor ble men of all nations in the same category with Beast Butler. Persecutions of unprotected women, and in sults to paroled soldiers, are offenses which gentlemen and men of courage never forgive. To us it seems incredible that Sherman the “General” and Sherman the “Senator” can be the children ol the same parents. How the former must blush at the disgrace which has fallen upon the family, when he reads of the marvellous valor and prowess exhibited by the latter in calling Wade Hampton an “ impudent rebel ” and a “ whining eur.” Place the vitu perative Senator face to face with Wade Hamp ton, and he would not for the fame of Grant and the wealth of Butler venture to call him a “ whiuiug eur.” Class Legislation in Congress— ln Con gross, the following was introduced the other day; Mr. Darling presented a petition from the dealers in leaf tobacco and manufacturers of se gars in the city of New York, for an increase ot tariff on imported segars, which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means. As every new industry is started in our coun try—we mean the country to which the South erners are colonies—a like demand for special protection will be made, until the last article of foreign Importation has been excluded from our markets, and a free, unencumbered field be left to our Eastern manufacturers. Then, having no competition in the purchase of our agricultural products, they will fix them selves what prices their own interests will dic tate, or let the crops of the rich West, North west and Southwest go to rot on the hands of the farmers, who, at the same time, will be sad dled with the payment of the public debt, the evidences of which, gathered in the hands of the manufacturers, as their accumulated profit, will he free from taxation. How will those great States receive such a legislation ? Already their corn is found to be cheaper than coal or wood for fuel, and the ex actions of the railroad, almost equal to the im positions practiced here by the Mobile and Ohio road, have prevented their crops from seeking the sea border. What will it be, when the price, ceasing to be fixed by foreign demand, and settled by an ex change of merchandises, shall be left to the sole caprice of the Northern manufacturers? We, of the South, have no voice in the matter, but those who fought in person, aud not by merce naries, will hardly stand such legislation. [Mobile Times. The Cotton Crop in Georgia. —For sev eral days past, we have been engaged in col lecting ail the information we possibly could, relative to the prospects of the present growing cotton crop in onr State. From all our sources of information, the conclusion has forced itself upon us, that the result of this year’s planting will prove to he a most unprofitable one for our farmers. The crop will turn out to be an ex ceedingly short one, if the half that has been reported to us be true —which is, that most of the seed planted has proved to be imperfect, the plant itself, after its appearance above ground, almost invariably failing to take root and sus tain its growth. On very many plantations, there will be entire failure; on others, only partial, some greater, some less. This, with the experiment of free labor, now being tried in the State, warrants, we think, the conclusion to which we have come, that the cotton crop of Georgia will be an exceedingly small one. [Atlanta Intelligencer. Special Pardons—Abandoned and Seized Property. The following important news we take from the Washington correspondence of the New York Times, under date of the 4tli: The President sent a message to the House of Representatives, in answer to a resolution re questing the names of persons worth more than $20,000 to whom special pardons have been is sued, and a statement of the amount of proper ty which had been seized as belonging to the enemies of the Government, or as abandoned property, and returned to those who claimed to be the original owners. Accompanying the message is a communica tion from the Secretary of State, who reports to the President that of the seven thousand one hundred and ninety-seven eases of pardons passed upon by the Attorney General there still remain in the State Department seven hundred and seveu cases which, not yet haviug been finally disposed of, have been stricken from the accompanying list. The Attorney General, in a communication to the President, says it does not appear from the records of his office how much property, real, personal and mixed, has been seized and forfeited to the United States under the act of 1802 as enemies’ property; nor do they show any property taken from officers of the United States and returned to the ene mies of the Government; nor is there anything in that otfiec in regard to abandoned property. The list of pardons granted under the Am nesty Proclamation of the President under the 13th exception is as follows: Georgia, 1,228; North Carolina, 482; Texas, 269; New Mexico, 1; Mississippi, 765; Louisiana, 142; Alabama, 1,361; South Carolina, 688; Arkansas, 41 ; Mis souri, 10; Kentucky, 12; Florida, 38; West Virginia, 48. _ A communication from the Secretary of the Treasury says, as to how much property, real, personal, and mixed has been seized as forfeited to the United States has been returned to those who claimed to be the original owners, there is no information in the Department on the sub ject as understood from the general and vague terms of the resolution. It is presumed the act alluded to is that of July 17, 1862, the exe cution of which, as he understands, was com mitted by the President to the Attorney Gen eral, and so fir as he is advised, the Treasury ( Department lias not undertaken in any case the enforcement of its several provisions, or to re lease any property held as forfeited under them so far as the Department is concerned. The abandoned or confiscable lands heretofore held by it were turned over, under the Secretary’s circular letter of June 27 last, to the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands, hi accordance with the provisions of the act of Congress, approved March 3, 1865, aud Exe cutive orders on the subject, and that no freed men occupying any of said lands have been dis placed by any action of the Department at the request or for the benefit of returning rebels. The Secretary of War, in his communication to the President, incloses several reports, among them one from the Adjutant General’s Office, saying there are no records therein per taining to the restoration of property as de fined m the resolution of inquiry. Quarter master General Meigs says the railroads cap turod and held as a military necessity have been returned to the companies under Execu tive orders of the Bth of August and the 14th of October, 1865, and those in the Atlantic States under orders of the War Department, all on condition of reorganizing and electing loyal hoards of directors and giving bonds satisfacto ry to the Government that they would, within a reasonable time, pay a fair valuation for the Government property turned over to said companies and sold to them on credit. Major General Delafield, Chief of the Engineer De partment, says that the Department has caused no property to he seized under the act of 1862 as enemy’s property, and none lias been taken from the officers of the Corps of Engineers and returned to the enemies of the Government who claimed to be the original owners. The Department has, however, taken possession of large tracts of lands and fixtures in both rebel and loyal States, as a military necessity, and occupied the game with temporary works, which, ceasing to be needed or used for offen sive or defensive purposes, have been disman tled, and the movable parts sold on account of the United States, except in eases where the loyal owners agree to receive the usual build ings as a discharge of all claims on their part against the United States for use, damage, &c., in which ease their property was returned to them on this understanding. The Chief of Ordnance says the records of his office show only case where captured prop erty received by the Department has been re turned to any one. This was machinery cap tured at Macon, Ga., which has been returned to the former owners on the application of Brigadier General J. D. Webster, recommended by Lieutenant General Grant. General Howard, of the Freedmen’s Bureau, gives a list of the property seized under the act of July 17,1862, and subsequently restored to former owners. The greater portion of the property of this character is situated in Vir ginia, and was formally set apart tor the use of refugees and freedmen, by a circular. It be came apparent, however, tfiat much of it had been improperly seized, and to avoid injustice, action under the circular was temporarily sus pended. Fart of this property had been mere ly libeled. Against part the proceedings had readied a decree of condemnation and sale. — Very little, however, was actually sold. On September 12,1865, Circular No. 15, series of 1865, was issued to govern the action of the Bureau respecting property. This circular, originally drafted by the Commissioner, was submitted to the President, who materially amended it, and it was promulgated as received from him. With respect to property seized under the act of July 17, 1862, this circular declares that it shall he regarded as confiscated only after an actual sale has taken place, and directs Assistant Commissioners of the Bureau to re store it when it appears satisfactorily that it has not been confiscated. Such property has, therefore, been restored upon proof that pro ceedings against it had been dismissed in the United States Courts. The records of the office do not show whether parties to whom such property has been restored were con nected with the army of the so-called Con federate States, or whether they gave aid or comfort to the rebellion. General Howard says the estate of William Aiken, in South Carolina, was restored by order of Major General Sickles, commanding the department. Three estates were surrendered for the reason they were not actually abandoned. Os the remainder some were given because very few freedmen were resident upon them, and those could be more advantageously located elsewhere. Tiie others were restored after mutually satisfactory agree ments had been entered into between the freed men and the former owners. All of these place* of property were embraced in General Sherman’s Field Order No. 15, and the authority for the action taken by the Bu reau in respect to them was derived from the instructions of the President, contained in General Orders No. 145 from the War Depart ment, bearing date- October 9, 1865. The "pro perty held under the act of July, 1862, and the abandoned property actually allotted to resi dent freedmen, comprised but a small portion of the entire amount which the Bureau has held in its possession. In August, 1865, an ap plication was received tVom B. B. Lake, of Tennessee, a former soldier of the rebel army, who had received a special pardon. His prop erty was clearly abandoned, and his application was not granted. An appeal was made to the President, and on the 16th of August was re ceived at the Bureau with the following en dorsement : Executive Office, August 16, 1865. Respectfully returned to the Commissioners’ Bureau. R. Fox. The records of this office show that B. B. Lake was specially pardoned by the President on the 27th ult., and was thereby restored to all rights of property except as to slaves. Not withstanding this, it is understood the posses sion of His property is withheld from him. I have therefore to direct that Gen. Fisk, Assist ant Commissioner at Nashville, Tenn., be in structed by the Chief Commissioner of the Bureau of Freedmen, Ac., to relinquish pos session of the property of Mr. Lake, held by him as Assistant Commissioner, Ac., and that the same tie immediately restored to Mr. Lake, file same action will be had in all similar eases. Andrew Johnson, President ol the United States. In complying with these definite instructions, tile Bureftu lias been compelled to part with the greater portion ot the property once under its control, except in the very few cases where property lias been actually sold under the act of July 19, 1802; and in that portion of South Carolina and Georgia embraced in the pro visions of Gen. Sherman’s Field Order No. 15, its tenure of property has been too uncertain to justify allotments to freedmen. In addition to the property seized under the act of 1862, and abandoned property allotcd to freedmen, 400,000 acres of abandoned land, not allotted to freedmen, have been restored to former owners. Recapitulation. —Property seized under the act of July, 1862, and restored by the Bureau, 15,452 acres; abandoned property allotted to freedmen, mul restored by the Bureau, 14,652 acres; abandoned propert y not allotted to freed men, restored by the Bureau, 400,000 acres.— Total, 430,104 acres. Our Financial Condition. The Ist of May public debt statement from the Treasury Office to-day shows a reduction in the grand total of $15,956,000,094 since April 1; tiie funded gold-bearing stock of 1865 increases $6,000,000; the interest-hearing legal tenders decrease $7,500,000; the deposits in the Treasu ry, including $9,000,000 of gold, amount to $140,534,000, while the easii on hand to pay them off, amounts to $137,737,000, of which $76,676,000 in gold. The amount of this gold belonging absolutely to the Treasury is $07,- 640,000; the amount belonging to depositors* $9,033,000. The present monthly exhibit is the most encouraging yet made for the early reduc tion of the public debt to $2,000,000 to bear in terest, and tiie bill introduced in the Senate to day by Mr. Sherman, approved by the adminis tration of the Treasury, looks to the consolida tion of all classes of this interest-bearing debt to tiie uniform rate of five per cent, in gold ; in other words, to the introduction of United States five per cent, consols, having thirty years to run, and to be ultimately extinguished by the sinking fund of one per cent, a year saved in the difference between six and five per cent. The whole reduction since last summer, when the war reached its maximum, is now $68,092,- 000. The exact decrease of legal tender notes on the public debt statement of May 1, since April 1, is, in greenbacks, seven millions five hundred and eighty-four thousand nine hundred and thirty-four dollars. In five per cent, legal ten ders due and paid off, $2,500,000. In compound legal tenders, $5,000,000. Total, $15,084,934. Tiie following is a statement of tiie public debt of the United States on the Ist of May, 1866: Debt Rearing Coin Interest. Five per cent, bonds $198,241,100 00 Rix per cent, bonds ofl 867-08 18,313,591 80 Six per cent, bonds 1881 283,744,150 00 Six per cent, five-twenty bonds 685,884,000 00 Total debt bearing coin Interest $1,186,092,841 80 Debt Rearing Currency Interest. Six per cent, bonds $4,694,(88)00 Temporary loan 131,497,853 62 Certificates of indebtedness 62,620,000 00 One and two year five per cent, notes.. 6,036,900 00 Three year compound interest notes.. 167,012,141 00 Three year seven-thirty notes 816,512,650 00 Total debt bearing currency Interest. .$1,188,313,544 02 National debt not presented for pay ment $877,729 64 Debt Rearing Interest. United States notes $415,164,318 00 Fractional currency 28,192,017 .54 Gold certificates of deposit 9,036,420 (8) rrt Total debt bearing the interest $452,392,755 64 Total debt $2,827,073,871 60 Amount in Treasury. Coin $76,676,407 02 Currency 61,310,621 80 Total in Treasury $137,987,028 82 Total debt 2,827,670,871 (8) Amount of debt, less cash in Trca5ury52,689,689,842 78 The foregoing is a correct statement of tiie public debt, as appears from tiie books and Treasurer’s returns in the Department on the Ist of May, 1806. Hugh McCulloch, Secretary of the Treasury. Sumner in his Glory.—A Washington let ter says: It wag an amusing sight to see Sum ner enter the Senate this morning, with the two young heroes to titles, who are now on a visit to the capital. Since their arrival there Sumner lias stuck closer to them than a broth er—closer than a colored brother sticks to the Freedmen’s Bureau. Such todyisin and Flun keyistn combined is rarely seen, even in Wash ington. Down sat the two young gentlemen, (and quiet, nice young gentlemen they arc,) on a sofa in the rear of Sumner, while Sumner did his usfaal deportment, and then took his seat. Enter, impressively, Sumner’s secretary, and hands a book and dummy letter to Sumner Sumner waves the secretary behind him, after the manner of Podsnap. Visible sensation on the sofa. Young Englishmen evidently im pressed. Sherman rises and taikH about the rinderpest, and tiie slaughter of whole heca tombs of oxen in England. “Where did you say?” queries Sumner. “In Great Britain,’' replies Sherman. “ Oh, aw,” says the satisfied Stunner, and then turns with a Podsnapian glance to the young Englishmen, and a patron izing srnile, which seems to say: “ You—sec— rny—young—gentlemen—that we are accus tomed to speak of Great Britain in the Senate of the United States—though we generally say England or the English people. You may see that I wear gaiters ” —indeed, there is no tell ing how much Sumner’s evident “ tootling” of Sherrnan for a display before the young English men meant. It was evident enough to cause a genera) titter in the galleries, which broke into a broad smile when Sumner followed Sherman in a small speech on the rinderpest. VOL. 24. NO. 20. The Income Tax—lnstructions to Assessors. Tiie following instructions have becu issued by the Internal Revenue Otliee, which should be observed in the assessment of the annual taxes of 1860. We give merely what relates to tiie most important items: Only one deduction of six hundred dollar* is allowed from the aggregate incomes of all the members of any family composed of parents and minor children, even though only one pa rent may be living. It is not essential that the children live with the parents. Husband and wife are regarded as members ot the same family, though living separately, unless separated by divoroa or other operations of law such as to break up the t uoily relations. If the members of a family have separate incomes, the returns may be made separately liy the proper parties and a .reusable proportion of tiie six hundred dollars deducted from the income of each. Tiie parent, as the natural guardian of the minor child, is required to make return for him ; hut where any other guardian or trustee lias been appointed the return should lie made by tiie latter. Rent of homestead actually paid may be deducted, hut the rental value of property owned by the tax-payer is not a subject ot de duction. Any person claiming a deduction on account of expenses for room rent must satisly tiie assessor that the room or rooms occupied lii’ him constitute his home, and that he has no residence elsewhere, and this being shown, lie may be allowed to deduct what lie actually pays for rent of such rooms. When rent is included and deducted as an expense of business it must not again be deducted as rent. Nor should a person hiring a house and sub-letting a portion of it be allowed to deduct more than tiie excess of hie payments over his receipts. Where no repairs have been made by the taxpayer upon any building owned by him during the preced ing live years, nothing can be deducted for re pairs made during tiie year for which income Is estimated. Taxpayers frequently claim deduc tions lor losses in depreciation in the value of stocks or other property of a like nature. No deductions can in any case he allowed for div predation of value oi' such property until it is actually disposed ot and a loss realized. Costs of suits and other legal proceedings arising from ordinary business are to lie treated as other expenses of such business, and may be deduct ed from the gross profits thereof. Expenses for medical attendance, store lulls, Ac., arc not proper subjects for deduction. Expenses of repairs of implements, tools, Ac., used in busi ness, may be deducted. Among tiie national, State, county mid muni cipal taxes deductible from incomes are com prised such internal revenue taxes as have not been included In expenses of business, ami such municipal taxes as are assessed ratably upon all the persons liable to such assessment; but assessments made by municipal authorities upon tiie inhabitants of a particular locality of a town or city on account of special improve ments in or upon tiie streets adjoining the pre mises of such inhabitants, tiie same not being assessed ratably, are not considered as taxes de ductible from income. If tiie manufacturer dealer lias been in the practice ot estimating ills annual profits by taking inventories of stock, lie should take tiie cost value of such stock, un less lie has taken the market yalue in making previous returns. Whichever method lias been adopted by the taxpayer should tie adhered to uniformly. If interest accrued during the year on notes, bonds, Ac., is good and collectable ut the ''nil ot the year, It should he returned as income, whether collected or not. The fact that- in come is devoted to the payment of debts does not release tiie same from liability to Income tax. Residents should make return in the dis tricts where they reside at the time of making the return. The residence required, under sec tion 116, for the purpose of taxing income, is held to be a residence during the year for which income is derived. If any person subject to income tax resides abroad, ills return should be made in the district where lie last resided. Citi zens ol the United States residing abroad are subject to tax upon their entire incomes, from all sources whatever, and the same is true ol foreigners residing in tiffs country. The term real estate includes all lands, tenements and hereditaments, corporeal and incorporeal. Pro tits on real estate purchased in a previous year need not he returned us incomes, nor can losses on such Bales be deducted therefrom. Where an income exceeds live thousand dollars, six hun dred dollars will be exempt, four thousand dol lars subject to tax at five per cent., and the re mainder at ten per cent. All expenses for insurance upon property, and all actual losses in business may be deducted from the gross in come of the year. Gold and silver plate is sub ject to tax it kept for use, whether actually used or not, except ns provided in schedule A. If kept in hank, witli no intention to use the same, sucli plate is exempt. The National Exfhkss.—Wc had a ride yesterday evening. The wagons of the Nation al Express and Transportation Company—six in number—two drawn by four horses each, two by two, and two by one—were out, and with full loads of the handsomest gentlemen in town, including ourself, drove through the principal streets. The wagons- arc the hand somest that ever appeared on tiie streets of At lanta, the horses are all fine looking animals, and worked well, and withal, the display was one calculated to attract the attention of the public. After traversing Ihc principal street", the train drew up In front of the Planters’ Hotel, when several bottles ofchampagne were popped, and the “National Express and Mr. Wood ward, Us gentlemanly Superintendent,” were proposed. Mr. Woodward being present, re sponded in a lew appropriate remarks. Three cheers were then given for the “ National,” and three for O'Halornn and the Planters’ Hotel, and the assembly dispersed well satisfied witli the afternoon’s enjoyment. ~ We arc glad to see that tiie people look with favor upon this enterprise, and we have not a doubt that it will iceeive patronage commen surate with the necessity that exists for its in auguration.—Atlanta New Dr a. New York, May s.— Tiie Herald's Havana correspondent says : Marlin, the Liberal com mandant at Alrnoa, encountered a lorce of Max imilian’s troops near Villa del Puerto, and was defeated, losing three pieces of artillery. Gar cia’s force was broken up into small bands.— Thirty-three persons were arrested and tried by court-martial for uttering sentiments favorable to Juarez. Miss Mary A. H. Gay. of Decatur, Ga., re quests us to acknowledge, in her behalf, the receipt of three hundred dollars, contributed by citizens of Macon and vincinity, for thepur pose of removing tiie Confederate dead from the battlefield in Franklin, Tennessee, and interringthem in the cemetery lately dedicated to that purpose by Col. McGavock. [ Slacon Jourhal a Messenger. Gen. Finnegan. —Gen. Finnegan has located at Fcrnandina, Florida, aud is devoting himself to developing the future metropolis of that State.
