New-York tribune., 1870-06-03

Congress there had 30 more, making 70
Ia years, and 63 only in the 30 preceding years III, luz
very day 1900 had been voted to men who had pee
decided to have right to dollar because tney h h
| REDUCING TAXATION.
While Mr.. Dawes was speaking the morning nun NV, w w
prcd and the House. at 1880 O'Clock, resumed the cu
sideration of the bill TO reduce the INTERNAL lAeS o
question being the sections relating To te income aA
| Mr. MCCRARY 0{ep Iowa. opposed the abolition OF
the income tax that tax was the only mode by
made TO contribute TO the national revenue =, - 49,
Mr.. ONEILL rep. PENN declared himself ior fr 9 tnS
modification Of it, either "a to rate or amount Oh eAenp
to9 SI me- 70 M he World its perfect ability 10 pay
national debt, and hence il was time to remove odOuS
and Xos taxes lie believed that the country
satisfied to cancel the national debt at the rate OF
S5OOOOOOO year instead OF at SlOOOOOO9O year .
| the income tax The pending b proposed reduction
of taxes by S3 10000 but if the income tax were abol
tion OF taxation other matters How could members
home and say that they had abolished taxaon on % tne
rich and kent IL the pOOrf The income TAX was e
rest of all taxes, because fell on the rch not on 'he
Mr.. TOWNSEND Ger, PENN declared that the clamor
for the abolition OF the Income tax was local anu
fictitious Onc gotten up in the interest OF men OF age
fortune He did not find any response among the pGO-
pie but cOnaned To comparatively few individuals.
TO relieve of moderate means. In his own District
the Income tax paid now by S6S persons but WIN
be reduced to SOo and yet that 500 would pay
of the present amount collected ana Wouu iiho ,i M S
| the rate to three per cent.
| Mr.. JUDD Bep., Ill.) offered amendments confnng
the tax to invested capital and excluding profits ana Ill
Mr. HILL Hep n. J) favored the abolition of the in
come tax but if il 10 be continued he wanted me
to be reduced TO three cent, and the exemption
| Mr.. KELLOGG d9ep, Conn) characterized the income
tax odious and unpopular tax IL was imposed at
time of national necessity and after the war was
solemn pledge was given TO the country that II should be
continued until 1870 and longer He would therefore,
| oppose its longer continuance, ana II IL were not
abolished, he would favor reduction OF the rate ana an
| Mr.. NIBLACK Dem, indy said he had always favored
making invested capital of the country pay its fair
contribution the but he not in favor OF
| itself whether the income tax should be retained or
struck altogether he would vote to strike 1t out alto
revenue enough could be collected without IT, 1t was
very plausible thing TO say that the income tax affected
rich only but the fact was that the income tax
affected all the business Of the country and finally fell
| Mr. HALE rep, Mel moved to increase the exemp-
ton to $1,000 THIS would take out the small professional
and clerks and leave the tax to be paid by those
Mr. YARD Gep, N " said that the opposition to the
continuance OF the income tax sprang from very small
special interest Special interests got hold Of the news
| papers pursued members into their COmmitteerooms
and to their homes and special interests very apt
to be regarded fOrgetulDess Of the interest Of the
great of the people II they abolished the income
property that reached the income of the bOndhoders
| Mr.. MYERS (Rep., PENN advocated the abolition of
was unanimous for ITS abolition. II it could not be abO
ished he favored the reduction of the rate and the in
of the exemption In reply TO the remark OF his
colleague CrOwnsend that this cry did not reach the
country he said that the farmers did not pay an income
tax 1t was paid by living in the large cities, the
city Of Philadelphia paying more than several states put
Mr. FiNKELNBURG nep, MOI moved to limit the
allowance for house rent TO $780, and argued that that
would be i'm prOporon to the money exemption. While
be favored modification OF the income tax, he OPP
posed its total abolition and lie believed that that was
The sentiment people of Louis which city he in
| partrepTesented.
MIR WOOD Dem.. y. " said that in his judgment the
neople demanded reduction of taxation and il for
Congress to determine whether the income tax not
one that should be abolished He believed that
1t unjust, unequal and unconstitutional the COnst-
tuition requiring taxation 10 he collected IN proportion 10
population The State of NewYork paid 30 per cent
OF the income tax while its population was only one
twelfth of the entire population of the country. The
largest Taxpayer in the United states was A. T. stewart
He had paid tax an income Of 81 O00O year into
the Treasury, but not he who actually paid it IL
the people who purchased goods from him. He was
but the agent of the people and charged that tax upon
| them IN the prices of his goods
the argument Of Mr.. Wood, the people OF the Western
States while not not Rayg SO n5S ts rn S
lust as Mr. Stewards customers paid his income tax in
The additional prices for wares. He willing to
extend the exemption $OOO and then retain the tax
all incomes whether from business, or from property
| Mr. SARGENT Uiep., Cali remarked that there
not one chance twenty that the Tariff bill would pass
Congress this session, 'and II was doubtful, besides,
whether that bill made reduction He believed there
fore, that the pending bi was the only opportunity
taxation. He would, Therefore, favor the abolition OF
the income tax ana II IL 1oI Gt pea ne aDQJSheu me "Dua
honestly collected it would In few years pay oil the
| Mr. POTTER Dem, y. " agreed with the argument
of his colleague Davis that the House was estopped
that this tax, tax odous oppressive, so de
Inoralizng could be for the public good matter what
amount of revenue collected under it, No his
side of the House objected to the taxation of capital
such tax easily collected; but the evil OF this law
its demOrzng character, and that offered re-
ward to fraud and falsehood, and imposed burden ON
Mr. DAVIS G3ep, ~ " concluded his argument Of
yesterday against the income tax He opposed 1t for It's
Injustice and inequality, 1t allowed exemptions to
cumuated wealth 1t exempted sevencnths Of the ac
e1rSIs1 9 gf1n for it positon The sxcmptn Of ac
mn ed
case nothing less than cOnfiscatlOn.
Mr SCHESCK Rep., Ohio asked Mr. Davis what he
meant by exemption of accumulated wealth.
Mr. DAVIS explained that if man had $4,000 Of
muated wealth invested in bonds and mortgages yield
ing five per cent and above his ordinary taxa
tion that $500, and by this law that sl,jOO was
exempt.
Mr. FITCH CRep, Nev) argued that the taxation
might safely be reduced 600 and that reduction
would be popular or 90 50 far as the abolition of the
Mr. FARNswORTH Rep, Ill favored the contnu-
of the tax and the increase OF the exemption TO
to the objection that the tax should be
capital said that business was capital brains
capital professions were capital As 10 the objection
that the wa inqus0Tlal he argued that 1t was no
inquistOra than other taxes and that argument
was inconsistent with the other arguments that many
| evaded the payment of their income tax.
Mr. BANKS Qiep., Mass said that he was opposed TO
a tax which Oncht not be revived. 1t was unequal
and unjust. The bulk OF it collected wages
salary and represented the productive energy Of the
country II revived it would produce great discomfort,
would be eyaded OF resisted as an unconstitutional
Mr.. INGERsOLL Rep, Ill., said, after listening yes
teray debate the match tax, and after listen
ing to-day the debate the income tax he led to
| exclaim, Consistency thou art jewel" The
members who argued yesterday against abOlishing the
match tax which brought g. 10000 into the Treasury,
to-day arguing IN favor OF ab0lshlpg the income
home and told that 10 the people he expected that the
people would hurrah for them and elect them unani-
mGnsly Laughter As to the income tax being in;
| as the Tariff law, under which men and women were