The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1894-06-29

u sion was continued for nine hours
and when adjournment csms ut 7 p.
III, there were only two sections of the
tariff bill undisposed Of,
ALI the income tax sections which
had remained over from Wednesday
were gone through with, and then an
omnibus motion to strike them all out
was made by Hill. This was the i'm
portant vote Of the day aud the deci.
sion was against the motion by ma.
jority of sizteen-23 to 49, Only two
Democratic senator's, Hill, of New
York, and Smith, Of New Jersey, voted
for it, while three Populists and six
Republicans voted against it.
FIFTEEN OBJECTIONS
When Mr.. Hill submitted his motion
to strike all sections relating to income
tax out Of the bill, hs epitomized hi,
objections to the income tax, as fol.
lows;
First-An income tax has no legitimate
place in tariff reform bill 1t is unjust
to those who desire to support revision
Of the tariff, but who cannot consistently
or couScientiously favor au income tax
Second-Au income tax is neither Dem
ocratic nor Republican principle and has
never been approved by the people at the
polls, but is one Of the doctrines OF the
Populist party.
Third-lt is an unnecessary tax. The
debate has conclusively demonstrated the
fact that the needs OF the treasury will
not require tho proceeds OF this tax.
Fourth-It is direct tax within the
true intent and meaning OF the constitu-
tion, aud not being laid in proportion TO
population, it is unconstitutional and
cannot be enforced.
Fifth-It is unequal, unjust and sec
tional in its design.
Sixth-lt is the revival Of an odius war
tax in a time Of profound peace.
Seventh-The exemption Of all incomes
not exceeding $4,000 is an exemption un-
precedented in the history Of income tax
legislation here or any where in the world,
and stamps the measure as the most Of
fensive species Of class legis alton.
Eighthr-It is unjust and indefensible in
it's Determinations. 1t unnecessarily and
injuriously discriminates agai nst corpor
ate investments by individuals especially
small investments.
Ninth-lt is retroactive in its operation.
Tenth-It usurps those fields of revenue
which properly belong to the states. Tar
if taxation being exclusively under the
constitution the province Of the federal
government it should mainly conflne Itself
TO that melho Of raising its necessary rev.
enue, without encroaching upon the
rights, prerogatiyes and revenues or the
states.
Eleventh-Its provisions are inquisltor
ial and offensive In their character. 1t is
q system Of taxation adapted to monarch.
ical government, but uusuited for q free
government
Twelfth-It violates the constitution be.
cause it usurps those revenues derived
from certain domestic corporations which
the states themselves have created and the
revenues of which corporations the states
have set apart for the use OF their Own
state governments. Those revenues can.
not cOnstitutionnlly be destroyed, dimin.
ished or interfered with by the general
government.
Thirteenth The absorption Of these leg.
itimate state revenues by the general GOV.
eTnment as here proposed will necessarily
states and add to the existing direct bur
dens OF the people.
Fourteenth-The proposed tax is double
that recommended by Secretary Carlisle.
Fifteenth-lt will duplicate taxation,
create friction and promote conflict or
contention between the general govern
ment and the states; is contrary to the
established policy of the government, is d
step toward socialism and is unwise from
every point of political experience.
MANDERsoNs AMENDMENT.
Mr.. Manderson. Nebraska, asked Mr..
Hill whether the paper which he had
read was an Indictment against the in
come tax features Of the bill.
Mr.. Hill-It partakes Of that nature.
Mr.. Mandsrson-l want to add an
other count.
Mr.. Hill-There ls ample opportunity
for great many more, but in my de-
sire to be brief left out large mum
ber
Mr.. Manderson-Ths count which !
would add is: 1T crsatess class to pay
u part Of the expenses of the govern
ment and 10 the first step toward the
creation of a privileged few, consti =
tuling moneyed aristocracy which,
contributing from their abundant rev.
enues or incomes to the support of the
government, will rule it"
The question was then taken on Mr..
Hills motion to strike out all the in
come tax sections of the bill, and the
motion was rejected-yess, 90; nays,
40 There We're only two Democratic
senators, Hill. OF New York, and Smith,
of New jersey. voting in favor OF the
motion, but ii was stated by Mr.. Smith
that his colleague. Mr.. Mcpherson,
would vote in the same way if he was
present Votes In the negative wer o
given by the three Populist ssnat ors,
Allen, Kyle and PETER. by Mr. Irby,
South Carolina, and by six Republican
senators-Messrs Hansbrough, Nit
chell, Oregon; Pettigrew. Power,
Shoup and Teller.