Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1866-02-08
cannot be or breathe anywhere within the
Hepublic. This joint resolution saws.

ft1.t - ENtrAI
IT cannot be or breathe anywhere within n
n Nepublic. This joint resolution says
n Representatives apd direct taxes shall he an,or,io,
,e aInong The several states which may he inrndet vii
10 W ,ns Loion according 10 their respective number
* counting tis whole number oi persons in each Ss,
3 excluding Indians moi taxed
> That is the exact language Of the Co,
r stitution. Indians not taxed are excluded
\ for the r,asons suggested by the venerab
n chairman gf the committee Mr. STEVENS
Q the other day, they are trib,l. are not pa
: OF the body-politic Of the United Stat,
until they arc subject to taxation.
. II Is objected to this resolution, anon
2 other things, that yon retain the 1rovisio
i OF the Constitution for the apportionme en-
: of direct tsxes. | ask the attention Of til
House TOR moment to the importance G
, that provision. ! know that in the practic
9 Of the Government it has been found en-
, tlrely useless in time Of peace. In the pres
ent century there have been but three oc
casions when that grant Of power in tn
Constitution has been exercised, and thos
three occasions were in time of war.
Inc effect Of the amen iment of my han
orable colleague Mr.. SOHgNcKl il to strike
out the third clause Of the second section
OF article one Of the Constitution, which
declares that direct taxes shall be amor
toned among the several States according
to the ratio of representation but his
amen1T ent le1ve5 and does not strike out
OF the Constitution the provi sions of the
eighth and ninth sections of article one. the
first OF which is that the Congress- Shall
have power to lay and collect taxes, &C. ;
and the second Of which is that mo capita.
ton or other direct tax shall be laid. unles,
IN proportion to The census or enumeration
hcreinbefore directed to he taken" How,
then. will the Constitution stand? Why.
sur, 1t seems to me that this fact is a fatal
! objection to the proposed amendment Of
my colleague Mr.. SCHENcK. If you are
/ to dispose nf the apportionment clause in
/ the first article of the Constitution as to the
apportionment of direct taxes among the
/ States, you must 20 further and limit the
/ power Of Congress to tax a. provided in the
eighth section. Take away the power, as
my colleague proposes, to apportion direct
taxes among the States, and leave the pow
er as my colleague proposes to impnse d.
rect captation tax, and you introduce into
your Constitution an express power to make
unequal and unjust laws, which was abhor-
red 3y the makers of your Constitution.
and against which they intended to provide
a perpetual safeguard in the clause for ap-
portionment OF all direct taxes among the
States.
The effect Of my colleagues substitute.
ifit be adopted, will be this: the apportion-
ment clause Of the Constitution as to direct
taxes will he stricken out; the granting
clause of the eighth and ninth sections, to
lay direct taxes, even capitation tax, will
be retained. What will follow? The ex.
press power to enact unequal tax laws, such
as are sometimes enacted across the waters
under the iron rule of England, the imposi-
ton of taxes, so as directly to make the
rich richer and the poor poorer.
Let me explain. You lay direct tax of
one dollar, or FIVE dollars, if you please, per
head upon every citizen of the United
States, and you strike out the apportion.
ment clause. The result is that the poor
man in his hovel surrounded by his ragged
children, his only earthly treasure, is com
for every member of his household; while /,
the single, chldless man, with his $ 100000 ,
Of annual income, pays not dollar beyond (
the assessment on his own head. Under |
the provisions of the third clause OF the
second section of article one, which my col
league would strike out, that cannot be-
Whyf Because capitation tax is direct
tax, and because the third clause, which my
colleague proposes to strike out, requires
that every direct tax shall be apportioned, +
not among the people, but among the States
Of the Union. The moment you so appor-
ti6n it, it becomes tax upon property, not
upon persons. | think, Mr.. Speaker that
it nothing else were SAID upon the subject,
this objection to the proposed substitute of
my colleague would of itself be fatal With
my present view of the matter, therefore,
vote for that amendment. I!
Mr.. SCHENCK. Will my colleague
yield to me one moment, that | may ask
him a question
Mr. BINGHAM. Yes. sir. h
Mr.. SCHENCK. Do | understand my
colleague to insist that in the ninth section
'f the first article there is no provision for
my direct tax except capitaton tax?
Mr. BINGHAM. No, sir; do not take
Mr.. sCHENCK. The language of that {
ection is:
proportion TO the enumeration hereinbefore
irecled to be taken.n
Mr.. BINGHAM I do not take that '
round, nor do intimate any such position; /,
ut insist that the terms of the ninth sec, :
ion of the first article of the Constitution =
firm beyond all question that every capita, :
ion tax is a direct tax; and [ will say fur .
her that the third clause of section second :
t the first article of the Constitution, which !
~ colleague by his substitute proposes to /,
trke out, requires and enjoins that every :
agitation as well as every other direct tax ,,
hall be apportioned among the States, and !
nat the moment it is apportioned it ceases .
} be tax upon the person and becomes tax :
pom property. | insist further that, if you =
rike out the third clause and lay your {
agitation tax, and assess it without appor- !,
onment, not upon property, but upon the :
erson, you thereby adopt mode of assess 1
eut, which the fathers Of the Constitution =
isely forbade, and which trust the people
: the United States will forsv sr prohibit. ?
Now, Mr. Speaker, what more is there of I
lis proposed amendment reported by the =
lint committee? | have stated that it I
andsin the very words of the Constitution, n
hitting the word Free = What objection, g
ZEN, can there be on that side of the House =
enacting it /? oh! the proyiso," say 70
q gentlemen-':the proviso which de- u
ares that whenever the elective franchise q
all be denied or abridged in any State on u
count ofraee or eoler, all persons ofsuch race y
color shall be excluded from the basis of r.
10 beg my friend from y
,hfornia, Mr.. HIaBY, and my honor p