Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-01-19

Mr.. Brown believed that the cotton
tax should be refunded, and whenever
that question came up in such shape
that he could properly vote for 1t he
would do so; but the adoption OF the
cotton.tax amendment would, he was
convinced, defeat measure which he
believed ought 10 pass. He should
therefore vote against the amendment.
Mr.. Morgan expressed his concurrence
with the views of Mr.. Brown. The
question Of the cotton tax had not been
considered by the Committee on Finance.
Il was O very grave question, and there
would he serious difficulty found in re-
funding the cotton tax. The effect OF
the pending bill would be TO remove oil
causes Of heart-burning that might be
lingering in the minds Of the peo-
pie OF the two sections He supported
il because Of its merits, and be did
not desire to have it connected with
any other great proposition which
would embarrass its passage. The
proposition offered by the Senator
from North Carolina was very disputed
one. If the people of the South had
the constitutional right to claim the re-
funding Of the cotton tax he would sup
port the claim; but he would never set
T NJ an equitable claim to it; for, after all,
/ II was the right of the United States
/ Government, from is standpoint that
/ the dissolution Of the Union Ivy the Sc
cession OF States was impossible, to tax
the people Of the South. He was not
prepared TO give n definite opinion on
I the consttutionality OF the cotton tax,
and would therefore sustain the position
of the Senator from Georgia Mir. Brown
/ Mr.. Vance said that the amendment
/ bad not been offered by him for the
purpose of defeating the bill, but he
could not see why if one tax were re-
funded the other should not also he re-
funded.
Mr.. Call. while advocating the amend
ment, opposed the whole bill.
/ Mr.. Beck said he favored the bill as q
/ measure Of Justice, but argued that 1t
/ should not be encountered with anything
/. else.
Mr.. VOORHEES, also regarded the amend
ment as one which If adopted would de
feat the bill, which he regarded as an
+ entirely Just measure and very creditable
to the gentleDon who had been most
active aud prominent III bringing 1t for
ward. he would look upon his vote for
the amendment as being a vote against
the bill.
MIR. Hampton stated some facts TO
show that the State Of South Carolina
has actually been mede TO pay some
$4,000, while Der quota OF direct lax
was only 100000.
Mr. sherman admitted the facts, bat
said that the Finance Committee had
thought i best not to deal with the mat
ter ;lrthor than refuuiinS the actual
money received by the United States.
Mr.. Hampton asked to be and was ex-
cuscd from voting on the amendment
because he was directly interested IN It,
A vote was taken on Mr.. Vance 5
amendment and it was reiected-yeas,
l6:n 46-as follows:
YEAs-1icssrs. Bate, Berry, Butler, Call, Coke,
Daniel, George. Hsrgis, Jones Of Arkaasae. fuih,
Quny, Ransom. Reagan, Vance, NalthGll, and
[ Wilson Of Muryllut-lG
NAYa-Ncsars AlIr.cn, Allison, Becs, Blair,
Pl.t-cif Brown Cameron, Chase. Chandler
Cocsror. Cuiiom. Davis. Dawes. DoIpb. Eyarts
Farwe1, Faulkner. Frye, German. hale. hnW!ey'
Hscoc6, toa. ingalls,. Mcfherson. MardorSon
Mitchell. Morgan. Paddock, Palmer, Paynr
Platl Plume. cRhin. salisbury, sawyer. Sher
B uan Spoouer, stanford, stewart, StOckprIdge
Teller. Iurpie, Nost, voorhees,, ana wilson d
Iowa..
Mr.. Chandler offered an amendment
restricting the terms Of the first section
to moneys paid by State treasures, and
inserting in the third section provision
for the return to individuals OF sums
paid by them. Rejected yeas, 10
nays, ~.
MIR. Plumb offered an amendment &c
repay the income tax collected from
military and naval officers during the
war. and argued against the bill rs uniarl
to the Younger States. The amount tha
would be refunded 10 The State Of Kansas
under the bill would be about 81 900
while its share of the tax necessary Il
pay the money appropriated by the bil
would be over half a million dollars, anC
for What ? Not under the guise OF pro
noting education, not under an,
assumed philanthrOpic idea, but because
: some clerk in the Treasury Department
had got "stuck in the matter Of book
keeping.
MIR. Sherman opposed the amendment
2 MIR. Teller argued against the bill III
70 thought it questionable whether 1t wa
I worth white 10 90 back so many years Il
: order to take up such a matter.
o. Mr.. Plumb's amendment was rejected
+ and the bill was paSsed-yeas, IS; nays
=, To- The negative votes were those @
$ Nessrs. Berry. Blair, Jones OF Arkansas
3 Paddock, Plat, Plumb, Salisbury
D Teller. Vest, and Wilson Of Maryland
q The bin directs the Secretary Of tn
Treasury to credit TO each State AM
n Territory and to the District of Conm
4 bia q sum equal to al collections mad
!. thercirom, or from citizens or inhab
e tants thereof. or other persons, undo
G the direct tax act of the 9TH Of Angus
g 1861. 1t RENTS all moneys stil que t
the United States under such act an
y anprOnr;ates the amount necessary IL
D reimbursement. sums collected d
. reclly from individuals to be held ]
trust by State for the benefit OF til
= persons from whom they were c0llecte
= or their legal representatives,.
e The Blair educational bill was the
# taken up aud Mr.. Brown addressed IT,
Senate in support Of it, stating that Il
e defeat would De received with great n
: yret throughout the whole southern se'
Y ton of the country. The Senator frol
S Missouri (Mr. NesO had in bis adj
" speech against the bill held over til
l. Senate ia tcrYorcm the presidential vet
r if The bill should pass lie did. not III
derstand the Senator to say that he ha
5 any information or knowledge as to I'll
!. Presidents intentions in the matte
:. bat supposed that he received his IN
preston from his knowledge OF the col