The evening world. [volume] (New York, N.Y.) 1887-1931, 1894-06-26
HILLS new ATTACK.
Would Exempt State, County and
City Bonds from Income Tax
Republicans Ioin Him in His Effort
to That End.
Proposed Amendment Defeated, %
to 80, In the Senate.

WASHINGTON, June 2G.-With the
thermometer standing at So degrees in
the Senate Chamber at 10 o'clock to-day
the Senate entered upon the thirteenth
week of the tariff debate. At the open
ing of the session, Mr. Allen pop.
Neb) made another Intellectual at
tempt to secure consideration for his
resolution directing the Secretary OF
the Treasury to inform the Senate of
the total number Of persons engaged
in protected industries. whose wages
might be affected by tariff legislation.
Mr.. Gallinger (Rep., N. h objected.
and Mr. Morrill, Rep., Vt) moved to re-
fer 1t to the Finance Committee. Mr..
Allen gave notice that, as long as the
resolution remained Enacted upon, he
would object to all legislation by unani-
nous consent. Mr.. Morrill's motion was
defeated by vote of l6 to II.
At 1890 the Senate resumed the con-
sideration OF the income tax provisions
of the Tariff bill.
MIR. Hill withdrew the amendment he
offered on Saturday to strike out the
provision exempting the interest on
of the tax. Mr.. Hill said his object In
Offering the amendment was to call the
attention of the country to the fact that
$685., 100000 Of property in Government
operation of the income tax under the
law, Although the ostensible purpose
OF the income tax was to reach wealth
and equalze taxation. there was an enor-
nous investment of capital which the
income tax could not reach.
Mr. Hill then moved to exempt State,
county and municipal bonds. He argued
Federal Government would he a direct
attack upon the administration of the
States. II the Federal Government had
bonds and securities, 1t had the right to
Aside from the question of the exercise
Ct doubtful tfu power, in justice to the
harshly. Mr.. Hin thought the States
should have the right to issue bonds
without being subject to Federal taxa
MIR. Vest thought the exemption pro-
posed presented q very different ques-
States bonds 1t was no benefit to the
States or municipalities to exempt their
bonds. The bonds were sold in the open
markets. They Wen, into the, hands
ject to taxation.
begged the question. The exemption
priGp3Ssed would rs, add nothing to the
would take nothing away. II it was fair
and right to exempt Government bonds,
Il was equally fair and RICH. to exempt
State and municipal bonds. 1t would in
no wise affect the holders. If State
bonds were to be subjected to Federal
taxation, they would bring less in the
market and probably have TO bear higher
rates Of interest. He maintained that
equality with the Federal government
with regard to the taxation of their
securities, great injustice would be
done.
IF the States by law specifically ex-
empted their bonds, could the United
states tax them" asked Mr.. Plat Rep..
Comm.
ENTHUSIASTICALLY not" replied Mr.. Hill.
That would be beyond the Consti.u-
tional power of Congress"
although he had no particular interest
in making this bad bill any better, he
hored, unon reflection, that the Demo-
cratic majority wiuld not place States
and MUNICIPALITIES, when they were
forced to borrow meney,. in q worse po-
sition than the United States
Mr.. Mitchell lRep., Ore) agreed with
Mr.. hili that the taxation Of state
and county bonds was of doubtful con-
stitutiOnality
Mr.. Hill said that there could be no
eNeInpting State, county ana municipal
securities He expressed the hope that
the Finance Committee would accept his
amendment
Mr.. sherman also took this view OF
the proposition.
Mr.. Hills amendment was finally lost,
% yeas to 80 nays.