The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-12-12
In the House of Representatives.

Mr. Hopkins, OF Illinois, spoke in sup
port oil the measure and in opposition to
the proposed amendment reiunding the
cotton tax. II there was merit in the lat
ter proposition, that merit should be dis
cussed in separate bill, and the amend.
ments should not now be brought forward
TO embarrass the consideration OF the pend
ing measure. lie controverted the posi-.
ton taken by Mr.. Barnes, OF Georgia, that
the cotton tax was unconstitutional, and
he contended that the tax was uniform, as
contemplated by the Constitution, being
levied the same in Illinois us in Georgia,
and having been collected from twenty-six
States and Territories. The assumption
that this tax had been paid by the people
OF the Southern States was mis-
take. II had been paid by the consumers
in the Northern States. In answer 10 the
declaration made by certain members from
the South that that section was borne
down by internal revenue taxation, he
presented comparative table to show that
the declaration was incorrect II il was
true that the producer instead of the con-
sumer paid the tax II would be seen that
in the decade ending 1880 Illinois had paid
SlSS, 242, 900 against 81, 10000 paid by
Georgia.
Mr.. Allen, of Mississippi, could find no
warrant in the Constitution for rciunding
the direct tax. The advocates of the bill
favored constitutional limits, but thought
that tho limitations should be on somebody
else and not on themselves. The principle
OF the bill was bad, that tax should be re-.
funded because some States had not paid
1t. II taxes were to be refunded the cot
ton tax was the first which should be dealt
with, and he gave notice OF an amendment
which would constitute the cotton tax
fund as an educational fund for the States
which had paid il.
Mr.. Seney, Of Ohio, supported the bill.
whose purpose, he said, had been grossly
misreprcsented. In the newspapers and
political gatherings Il was stated that the
bill was mere raid by the loyal States
upon the treasury. An examination OF
the facts would show that the sO-called dis.
loyal States would receive their portion Of
the money. II was true that tho bill
would take Sl7, ,0O0, 900 out OF the treasury,
but the money belonged to the people and
the sooner IL was legislaicd out Of the
! treasury and into the pockets OF the people
the better for the people. The people
needed II and the Government had no use
for it. II the bill passed IL would place
each and every State where il stood in
1861, when the tax was levied
Mr. Buckalew, OF Pennsylvania argued
against the policy Of taking money from the
National Treasury for distribution among
the States, and, in the name OF Pcnnsylya-
mia, he protested against throwing into her
treasury the sum Of 100000 10 disar-
range her with the conceived and well un.
dcrstood financial system and to test the
wisdom and integrity of her II a,islature.
Pending further debate the committee
rose.
The Speaker laid before the House n
communication from the Secretary Of
state, enclosing the final asc,rtainment OF
the result OF the election for President and
Nice-Presdent In New Jersey, Kansas,
Alabama, Louisiana, Missouri, MARYLAND,
North Carolina and Georgia. Laid on the
table.
Tho committee then resumed It's session.
Mr.. Elliott, OF South Carolina, generally
favored the bill, though hc thought Il
should bc amended in some particulars.
Mr.. Herbert, Of Alabama. opposed the
bill on constitutional grounds, aud be-
cause il would work an injustice. Passing
10 discussion Of the cotton tax, he ar.
gncd that Il was unconstitutional in that
Il was not uniform. A tax on cotton was
u tax on the only industry upon which the
people of the South must live.
Mr.. GrOsvcnOr, OF Ohio, said that the
validity aud binding force OF the act i'm.
posing the direct tax had never been
questioned. That tax had been LEVIED in
the direction Of ultimate free trade"
lie quoted those words because one wing
Oi the Democratic party would compel the
Government to support itself by direct |
taxation. II q 10 per cent tariff was
robbery per cent. was robbery pro tanto. |
4 direct tax seemed 10 be the ultimate |
goal Of the statesmen Of America who |
were inycighing against the idea Of taxa. |
ton on the articles consumed by the |
American people. A direct tax was an |
unpopular tax, and ono which should only |
be rcsOrlcd 10 IN an emergency. In 1851 !
such an emergency existed and the people |
Of the loyal States had paid the tax and !
raised the money 10 sayc the people Of the |
South from their iolly--hc would not say |
crime, because he did not wish 10 rake the |
smouldcring cmbcrs. Out Oi the common |
fund raised by the tax II was proposed 10 |
withdraw what the loyal Slalcs had put |
in and TO leave the South without is |
record Of dclalcn'ion..
Mr. Whiting. Oi Michigan. opposed the |
bill as being unconstitutional aud unjust |
IL would take money from the national |
treasury and place IL In the trJlsurics oi. |
the several States. The only object IN this |
was a reduction Of State taxes. aud the |
money would therefore practically 90 into |
the pockets Of those who owned property. |
lie was glad that the country had rfcsi. |
dent who would not sanction such lcgisla- |
ton. MIR. Enloc, Of Tennessee. declared |
that the bill was sustained neither by law |
nor 10y precedent denounced IL as q sub. |
teriugc and q fraud, and charged that ils |
aim was 30 pcrpc,uatc the power Of trusts |
20 exact tribute from the people by means |
Of high tariff. Referring 10 the cotton |
tax, lac attacked II on constitutional !
grounds, aud spoke in favor Of q proposed |
amendment clunding the tax as lar ms |
possible TO the persons who paid Il and rc- !
serving the romainjlras a common school !
fund
Mr. Dibble, Of South Carolina, stated !
that Il was a mistake 10 suppose that the !
State Of south Carolina wis la fault ag |
regards direct tax. As matter OF fact, !
more than its quota had boon paid in. llo |
thought that the reiunding tax was q thor |
oughly constitutional and equitable prop. |
usition.
Pending further debate, the committee |
rose and the House adjourned.
Educational fest Tor voters.
special Disp,trh tp The Appeal
WAsuSGroS, Dec. 1.-THE prophely |