St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-04-14
Hon. Thomas Wilson's Excel
lent Reasons for Opposing
the Direct Tax Bill.
It Is Opposed to the Constitu-
ton and to the Reduc-
ton Of Taxes.
The Hand Of the Protectionist
Visible in Every Line Of
the Measure.
It Is Also Unfair to Great and
Growing States Of the
Northwest.
Cotton Taxes in Excess Of the
Direct Tax Paid by South
ern States.
Congressman Macdonald, on
the Other Hand, Warmly
FavoPs the Bill.
Special to the Globe.

Special to the Globe.
WASHINGTON, April 13.-Congress-
man Wilson continues to act with the
opposition to the bill for refunding the
direct tax, and, after much urging for
the past ten days, has consented to
give his reasons for so doing. He says:
am told that the legislature of my
state has by resolution requested its
members in the house to favor such
measure. | believe that every member
but myself from the state Oh this floor
favors this bill. 1t is said, too, that it
would place in the treasury OF our state
S10S,000. These circumstances would
ordinarily command my support of any
measure; and would of this if | could
reason myself out Of the belief that it
is, to say the least, unwise, and a
pernicious and dangerous precedent in
any light in which it can be viewed,
But L cannot. By an act of congress,
approved Aug. 5, 1861, the United
Stotes levied and appropriated among
the inhabitants of the several states
and territories direct tax of S20,000,000
and provided for its collection. Under
this act and amendments thereto, col
lectionS were made from individuals
residing in various states; and many Of
the states assumed the amounts appor-
toned to their respective inhabitants,
receiving commission therefor of ID
per cent. In some of
THE SOUTHERN STATES
the United States was not able to col
lect this tax, and it has never been col
lected. OF the S20,000,000 there was col
lected Including the ID per cent? $17,-
359,6S5.51. No attempt has for many
years been made to enforce the payment
of the balance of this tax. 1t is by this
bill proposed to pay to the several
states on whose inhabitants this tax was
imposed, and from whom it was col
lected. a sum equal to the sum collected,
The preteXt laid as a reason or excuse
for this distribution is the fact that the
inhabitants of some of the states have
not paid their quota of the tax. 1t is
therefore said that it should be inforced
against the delinquent states or else re-
fund it to those that have paid. This is
Specious, but misleading. 1t cannot be
pretended that there is any legal obi
cations to distribute this money among
the states. If there is any obligation or
duty to do so it is merely a moral or
equitable one. And view of the facts
show that there is no obligation or rea-
son whatever for it. In 1862 an act was
passed imposing tax of 2 cents per
pound on raw cotton. Under this act
little was collected until 1862, when the
law was amended increasing the tax to
3 cents per pound. A bale of cotton
COULD NOT BE SOLD
until this tax was paid. Under this law
there was collected and paid to the
United States SOS, 072,3SS. l have here
diagram showing the sums due the
United States on the direct tax and in
what states, and the sums paid by the
inhabitants of those states on the cotton
tax, which shows that the sum paid on
the cotton tax was very much in excess
of the sum due on the direct tax.