New-York tribune., 1894-06-23


more in proportion TO population than the States OF
the South and West. but under the bill at large
they would pay less In proportion to their wealth
than the Southern and Western States.
As to the objection OF the income tax being In
ouisitoriaL Mr.. Teller compared II to the law for
the collection Of duties imports under which an
American gentleman lady might be met on the
dock by a "whppersnapper" OF Custom House
officer and asked. Have you any diamonds on your
person? Have you any smuggled goods? ana
might be taken into room and stripped and
searched And yet nobody complained OF tarin
law that account As to the Objection or the
avoidance Of payment of the income tax, Mr. Teller
asserted that the opportunities for fraud under an
ad valorem system three or four times greater
than under an income-tax provision
Nh Hin Dem ~ " said he desired to ask Mr..
Teller question but did not like TO Interrupt him
in a "set speech"
"1t Is not set speech" Mr. Teller said, and you
ar at liberty to interrupt me-.
Does the Senator from Colorado say" Mr.. Hill
asked that the financial condition Of the country
at this time makes impossible 70 have reduction
OF import duties withou. resorting to some other
system OF revenue
81 believe" Mr.. Teller answered. that II there
had been revision Of the tariff solely for the pur-
pose Of raising revenue II could have been done 50
that II would increase the revenue over that OF
1923"
Then are we to understand that the pending bill
VIII not OF Itself alone bring sufficient revenue Tor
the support OF the Government Mr.. HIN asked
II do not think IT wil was the answer
A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION.
"T commend that consideration. said Mr. Hill.
with a contemptuous we've OF his arm toward Demo
cratic Senator'S TO the gentlemen VINO engaged
in supporting the bill on ths side of the Chamber
Mr. Teller continued
10 not that this bhl without the .ncorne tax:
will bring sufficient revenue. II might 90 50. bit
some Of 1t coming due very soon. The income TAX
maneni system. /; has become one OF the features
OF revenue the world over-in Eng.and Italy, aus.
trla aad Germany-and is recognized everywhere as
equitable an9 just y,
NJ, Hills an income tax collected in any Re-
pubic on the face Of the earth? - ,,,
Mr.. Ts.ler-Oh, there are not great many Repno-
lies In the word; and do not know that any Re-
pubic except own can be he'd up as an ex-
emplar Of financial legislation. The Senator from
NewYork spoke Yesterday Of This biz shIpwrefSki,ns ,1
tSTest in whether it does or not But il anything
can give the Dfmocraic Psr{ hod on tne ooun f
just and equitable taxation.
Mr. Sherman Rep.. Ohio addressed the Senate
in an argument against the income He ad-
mtted that in 1871 he had expressed the opinion
as TO the constitutionaity and justice OF an Income
tax and he believed that under the then circum-
stances the repea. Of the income tax was measure
Of bad public policy. And II the circumstances were
the same now as then he should insist upon an IN
come tax He believed It to be a fair and just mode
was wise now. there was no necessity for IT,
Speaking Of the Mckinley act. Mr.. Sherman said
that the duty on sugar should never have Deen
disturbed 1t yielded large revenue easily COL
eced and 1t gave protection 20 the sugar-produclng
Industry Of the United states-a very important in
dustry TO the country. And he thought that, with
additions here and deductions ,here and without any
radical change the present law would be amply
sufficient for all the necessary expenditures OF fhis
Government without resorting to an income tax
He should therefore vote against the income tax
provision Of the pending bill because 1t was un-
necessary and because Il an invasion or the
taxing rights of the States. He regarded the reduc-
ton OF the exemption from 1900 to 5000 as an I'M
1,royement but thought that the line OF demarka-
tion should be at the point Of income enough to
cover the natural living expenses OF families IN the
ordinary condition of human society.
ATTACKING THE TRUSTS
Among the evils Of the present time Mr.. Sherman
included that invention. devish In all It's aims
and enas-trusts and corporations"
Take the case Of sugar. he added That trust,
on basis OF 50 900 Of property issued s50Ooco
wa,ered stock from 10 II per cent. at par-every
dollar of It the cost OF the people Of the United
much pains in striking at these corporations and
trusts, they would do a duty to their country more
this ihis' bin. '''N'
Mr. Patton Rep., Mch). the Senator from
Michigan. appointed in pace OF the late Senator
Stockbridge entered into the debate for the first
time and made a speech IN opposition 10 the pend
ing Tariff bill He read II from printed slips. very
rapidly and with no attempt at the graces OF
oratorv: but he had a very respectful attention on
the Republican side of the chamber. on the part
OF some dozen Senators who remained In thelr seats
to hear him.
Mr. Galnger CRep. n. H. asked and obtained
leaye 70 have published in The Record" "A very
remarkable communication published In The New
Sun pfv a elaborate
account of the industrial progress OF Japan and
showing that in the manufacture of wooden goods.
cotton goods. matches. soap rope machines UNI
brelas glass and other articles Japan Is making
most remarkable progress, and that the Western
World must face the competition OF thet new Ern-
pire in the Industrial word.
Mr. Chandler (Rep. n. H) recalled, In that con-
nect!on the interview between General Grant and
the Vlceruy Of China, in which General Grant asked
"How is It that your people do not seem to adapt
themselves to modern Inventions and modern ma
chlnery? Why do they not make more progress
I'm those directiOns?
The Viceroys significant answer was: The
people Of China are making progress in those d.
rections fast enough for the welfare of the United
States"
THAT remark" Mr.. Chandler added. was IL
lustraed by recent events. The labor Of the United
States was not only in danger from the under
paid labor OF Europe, but It's greatest danger N
the future was from the cheap labor OF India,
China and Japan"
Mr. Piatt Rep.. Conn.) made an argument against
the tax obectng to 1t first. that 1t was un-
necessary for the purpose OF raising suihcient
revenue, and, second, that the income|tax pro-
visions In the bill extremely faulty, inequita-
bic, unjust, and by their complications difhcuH Oh
execution.
NOT POPULIsT IDEA
Mr. Allen (Pop.. Neb) advocated the income tax
provisions of the bill and defended the PopuhSt
party from the charge that It proposed to over
ride property rights AS 10 the income tax being
unjust inquisitorial and Popustic Mr.. Allen de-
MED that 1t was a measure Of the Populist party
He wished It But II was both a Repupncan
and "A Democrat tic measure, and was the onIy re-
spectacle inheritance which the Populst party re-