The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1894-04-11


the legislative department on the other
do not seem to be always observed. The
truth is that the first information which
congress had of the alleged details of the
proposed bill was in the message itself
But the strangeSt part OF this unprece-
dented proceeding was that in fact at the
1898, neither the full committee of ways
and means nor the democratic members
thereof had agreed upon any income tax
or other internal revenue.
Compliments to voorhees,.
The senior senator from Indiana. Mr..
and reSOunding charge" Let me tell him
that Il is not half so noisy as the constant
vituperstions which we hear on every
hand from blatant demagogues who are
abroad in the land, loudly inveighing
against the wealth of the country and i'm
pudently demanding its confiscation
through every means which their devilish
ingenuity can invent
The public should not be misled into the
ceed 5000 are affected by this bill. That
is a mistaken idea. In the first place,
an those having incomes less than N,ooo
but more than $500, are put TO the annoy
ance of making sworn returns: they neg
lect il at their peril. In the second place,
it may reasonably be apprehended that
burse itself by an increase of rents where
the income was derived from that source.
degree PAS as fr'i we'll as rich rich iandloris The bill
seriously affects the rights and interests
Of building and loan associations through
out the country Incorporated under state
laws The senate amendments do not
cure the defects complained Of.
Alleged Discrimination
To show the sectional discrimination
of the tax he referred TO the income
tax Of 1S6S-73, which extorted from the
people an aggregate sum of sS47, ,229. =
S97.S6. Of this sum the eastern states
al aaf ha MID ct u
per cent, and together they paid IL
per cent. New York alone paid 30 per
cent. II has not been claimed that these
percentages will be materially changed
if this bill becomes a law. He added:
For my own part, as a democrat, pre-
fer indirect taxation and tariff reform
above direct taxes and tariff extinction.
i prefer taxing foreign products rather
than taxing home products. l follow JET
ferson in regarding even the species OF
indirect taxation on home products by in
ternal revenue war taxes as not good TO
be extended. and the first to be rid OF
when their need is past.
II McKinleyism is socialism for the ben
eft Of the rich and the income tax is So
cialism for the benefit Of the poor no true
American democrat will look to the hair
of the dog 10 cure his bite. American
democrats will reject socialism OF both
kinds. If my counsels were Needed, l
would surprise and satisfy the country by
the conservatism Of our progress I'm reve-
nue. reform. The Mckinley bill lost the
country 10 our opponents Dy It's extreme
features in one direction and we should
avoid the opposite extreme.
He quoted from the speech Of Senator
Voorhees, that the passage of the bill
would produce a surplus, and said that.
according 10 this statement, the bill has
Jumped out of the frying-pan into the
fire" From deficiency there has arisen
an immOderate surplus. One extreme
has been succeeded by another. The
committee made many changes. taking
sugar, iron, coal. lead and other articles
from the free list and making them duti-
able. and providing for a tax upon sugar
estimated by official experts to realize
81, ,S22. .62S.61. and additional tax on spir-
it's from which S10,0006O0 is anticipated.
Yet. Notwithstanding these large addi-
tions of revenue sources to the bill, the
committee still retained the income tax.