Collection: Directories and Documents > Nevada County News & Advertisments

About This Item:

Title: 1865 Collection Type: Directories and Documents Collection Name: Nevada County News & Advertisments # of Pages: 627 Download PDF: User Login Required Download OCR Text: User Login Required

Date Scanned: 2024-07-14 06:12:34 Item Sourced From: PDF First Created: 2025-03-17 04:07:44 Last Updated: 2025-03-17 04:07:44

Original Held At: Searls Historical Library Location: 161 Nevada City Hwy, Nevada City, CA 95959

Page: of 627  

GRASS VALLEY UNION FEBRUARY 21, 1865 107 of the year, to make the through trip from Sacramento allthe way by stage. But yesterday’s stage came along in good time between 3 and 4 o’clock. The melting of the snow has undoubtedly settled the roads. ARRESTED.—Josiah Dodge was arrested yesterday morning by the Sheriff, by virtue of a bench warrant issued from the County Court, and is now in custody under the joint indictment found by the Grand Jury against Robert Dodge, his brother, and himself, for the murder of Hammock. It is but just to the accused to state that he was in attendance at the County Court at the time the order was made. Josiah Dodge was admitted to bail in the sum of $5,000, by Judge McFarland, before whom his examination was held, after the Coroner’s inquest in the case, and before the finding of the indictment by the Grand Jury. The District Attorney moved for the arrest on the ground, that, since the indictment had been found, the crime charged being murder in the first degree, the accused was not entitled to bail. What further steps, if any, may be taken by his counsel, in the case, we have not been advised. HOW IT WAS MADE UP. The publication of the assessment roll for income taxes in this city has attracted considerable attention, and the [Sacramento] Union indulges in some pretty sharp remarks thereon. We can only account for the revelations made by the assessment roll in this manner: It was comparatively a new thing to most people, and we judge from appearances that the great majority in giving in their statements have confounded “savings” with “income,” and interpreted the latter to mean the former. That is to say: they have given as income only the money they managed to save during the year from all business operations, after paying all their family and personal expenses of whatever nature. On no other hypothesis can the so singular revelations of the assessment roll be accounted for. Men doing a mercantile business have given in their income at $600 and thereabouts. After deducting $600, as allowed by law, and say (to be very liberal) $500 for house rent for family, that would make their total income only $1,700 per annum. The $500, $600, $700, etc., that they give in would hardly suffice to pay store-rent. Truly, they must have erred and given in saving instead of income. We see the names of single men down for $700 or $800 who are in receipt of regular salaries of over $2,000 per annum. Now deduct $600 from their salaries, and $25 a month—$300 a year—for room rent, and it leaves their income proper at over $1,200 per annum. Yes, these men must have mistaken their total savings for their incomes. If such mistakes have not been made, and all incomes have been given in according to law, many dealers in this city are “running behindhand” every month in the year, for the incomes given in will not suffice to pay store-rent—Bee. It might be well for our citizens to bear in mind that the Revenue law requires them to give in the entire amount of money, over and above the actual necessary expenses paid out in carrying on their legitmate business, from any and every source whatever; the special exemptions being deducted afterwards, and credited to the account in the nature of allowance or drawback. Suppose a man takes up a mining claim this month, the prospecting of which in six months costs him $500,00, and at the end of that time he sells his interest for $5,000,00, and invests his money in building a fine house—has he not had an income within this year of $4,500, less the deductions allowed by the law? The fact that he invested his income in real estate does not change its nature—if next year he sells that house for $6,000,00, his income then would not be the entire price of the property, but only the profit he made by the sale. The Federal Government does not tax the value of a man’s property, but does tax the increase. THE INCOME TAX LIST.—Upon further consideration of the matter, we have determined not to publish the list of incomes assessed in this county for the year 1863. It is very possible that many persons, through ignorance of the requirements of the law, gave in only what they made clear, or saved, over and