The New York herald., 1870-06-03

coulo not De aholished he would favor Its reduction
lie oeeved that II the tax were honestly collected 1t
wopld ~ few years pay OF the national debt.
yTrEs - OF n ~ ~ grsed & WIZ ars ne
income @ s psS Syoa & &S0pGsa p&s dsSsa 4 TAX s
or any tax SO odous 20 oppressive, SO demoraliz
amount Of revenue was collected under 1t. No one
on his side OF the House objected to the taxation OF
OF this law was It's demorallzng character, and that
II offered reward TO fraud and falsehood, and Inn
posed burden on honesty ana fair dealing.
OF yesterday against the income tax. He opposed 1t
for its injustice and inequality. II allowed exemp-
tenths Of the accumulated wealth. The tax FELL in
great degree, Oh labor struggling for Its position.
case imposed III the other case nothing less than
cOnfscation.
Mr. scHENcK, trep.) OF OHIO, asked Mr. Davis what
he meant by exemption OF accumulated wealth
Mr.. DAVIS explained that II man had $4,000 OF
accumulated wealth invested in bonds and mort
over and above his ordinary taxation, that was
s., 800. and by this law that s., 500 was exempt.
Mr FITCH, lrep.l OF New, argued that the taxation
that reduction would be SO popular or SO fair as
the abolition OF the income tax.
rnuance or the tax and the increase Of exemption to
$4,000. As to the objection that the tax should be on
capital, ne said that business was capital brains
were capital, professions were capital. AS to the
objection that the tax was tnquisitoria he argued
and that argument was Inconsistent with the other
argument that SO many evaded the payment OF their
Mr.. BANKS, (rep.) of Mass, said that as far as he
could Judge oil the temper OF the people he repre-.
rented 1t would discredlt the government He was
opposed to 1t IN all forms, and would vote against
as a tax which ought not to be revived 1t was nn-
equal and unjust. The bulk OF 1t was collected on
wages. on salary, and represented the productive
energy OF the country. II revived 1t would produce
great discomfort and would be eyaded or resisted as
an unconstitutional tax.
Mr.. MGERsoLL, (rep.) Of H., said after listening
yesterday to the debate on the match tax and after
listening to-day to the debate the income tax he
Tbe 20 memer Wno srrns yeserday
abOishing the match tax, which brought 1,0OO 600
into the treasury were to-day argaing In favor Of
S25, 900, 900 year. When they went home and told
that the people he expected that the people would
(aughter) As to the income tax being inausitorial
he asked whether 1t was half SO inqusitoral as the
tariff law. under WHICH men and women were
favored, therefore. the continuance OF the income
tax with an increase Of exemption to $4,000.
Mr.. PoMERoY, (rep1 OF Iowa, argued In favor OF
the continuance OF the tax as admittedly fair and
equitable in theory II so, 1t should be continued and
enforced. He denied t that the % people asked for its
its repealg We're the factory operatives asking
for its Were the people on the frontiers asking
for IL? No. Ii was the wealthy people Of the cities
and the rich metropolitan Journals that were asking
for it.
MIR. ARCHER, (dem.) of Md, argued against the tax
as unequal in its operations, taxing the widow VINO
had an income OF three hundred dollars from invest
ments in bank stock, while men with incomes OF ten
thousand dollars escaped taxation. Its evils were
so abominabIe and annoying that the people would
be almost justified IN forcible resistance to it, But
he had little hope OF seeing 1t abolished while the
republican party remained In power.
Mr.. ATWOOD favored the continuance OF the tax
% e ons to PEI an
should be levied earlier In the year after the baanc
ing OF the years accounts OF business men,. The in
come tax was tax upon wealth, and, therefore, was
the fatrest tax that could be imposed There was
no pretence that Its repeal would be Of any advan-
Mr. KELLEY irep.) OF Pa, favored the repeal Of
the income tax which, he argued, was added up In
the cost Of business and charged against the people
1t was o tax upon intellect. 1t employed large
number OF officials TO assess and collect 1t. The ex.
emptions were unequal. lie favored the con,inu-
ance Of taxation on malt liquors, tobacco, stamps
and amusements.
Mr.. Benton, trep.l of,N H., argued IN favor Of the
sary. 1t was more just and equitable tax than any
imposed in the whole catalogue of internal taxation.
people was 20 pay of the national debt as soon as
possible, for with that debt hanging over the nation
It was IN no condition to resist insult or to protect
Mfr. WINANs, .trep.) OF Ohio, offered an amendment
dispensing with the tax on incomes from industry
and the eXercse of professions and to retain 1t on
incomes derived from capital.
- Mr. MooEE ep Of ILL favorea % g. the me
tat the popular demand for relief from taxation
was imperative and overwhelming.
Mr. HoTcHKIss, Tep.l OF n. r, opposed the con,
reduction OF revenue and return by the govern
ment to the principles OF economy.
ment leyyina tax % Of five per cent on income de-
rived from bonds OF every description, notes and
mortgages and other securities over the sum Of
81, 900 and under $4,000; seven per cent OH sums
between $4,000 and 1000, and eight per cent on
sums over $4,000. He argued In support Of his
amendment.
Mr. GARFIELD, (rep.) Of Ohio, offered an amend.
ment removing the tax from incomes derived from
business and combining 1t to incomes derived from
anita and ad In nf nat
Mr.. FARNswoRTH inquired whether that excluded
members Of Congress-
1t was intended to meet the objection that the in
come tax weighed unjusty on business and proies.
men m ana e5 ve1 woM Sn aay p ne aH
of the revenue from income and remit the other half
1t was q sort Of compromise measure.
Mr.. WOODWARD, (dem.) OF Pa, moved as substi-
tute for the thirty fifth section imposing the income
tax section providing for the Withholding OF tax
United States whenever held at home or abroad lie
argued that that would be an ample substitute for
the income tax, which he would then have wiped
away altogether. There was not particle OF re.
pudiati0n IN 1t, because all VINO held these bonds
were bound on every principle of reciprocity TO con-
dered their valuable and sae
Mr.. MORGAN, In reply to q question by Mr.. Ben
ton, said that the State OF Illinois paid million
and half internal revenue more than all New Eng
land.
Mr.. KELLOGG said that was not so.
Nj. JUDD explained the amendment which he had
notes. securities and all that class of property 1t
struck out all relating to the business OF the country
derived from trade, which he believed the trader
charged over to the consumer 1t left to be taxed
all incomes derived from speculation In real estate
ana incorporated companies: 1t struck out all that
related TO farm pr0ducts. II the amendment was
adopted it would leave the tax to be imposed on the
invested and realized capital OF the country, aud
not on the productive industry.
Mr. BROOKS, nep.) of Mass, offered an amend
ment striking out the provision requiring o man TO
account for the income OF minor children.
Mr.. HoAR, rep) OF Mass, offered an amendment
prohibiting the publication of income returns.
Mr.. BECK, tdem.) Of KY, offered an amendment
reducing the number OF persons to be allowed deduc
tions in religious social communities from ten to
eight
Mr.. DAWES moved to reduce the number to five.
Mr. ROOrs, trep) of Ark, admitted that the will OF
the people should be attended TO in regard to taxa
ton; but he believed that the will Of the people in
regard to the income tax was that 1t should not be
retained. 1t was with taxes as 1t was with the man
who had the boil on his nose, and who, when asked
where he preferred to have it. replied, ''Well, be-
lleve would rather have 1t on some other body"
(taughter.l a e
Mr. HOLMAN, (dem.l of NO., favored the conttnu-