The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1894-06-22
HILL ON THE INCOME TAX.
A Big Crowd Turns Out to Hear the
Senator Speak.

Hours and Forty-hve Minutes Con-
sumed in the Delivery-He Depre-
Gates Adding to the Differences in
the Party-Populistv Votes Bid Higher
for Than Democratic Votes. =
Washington, June 2!.-In the morning
half hour to-day the Senate passed bill
to define the boundaries of three judicial
districts in Alabama and regulate the
Jurisdiction of United States courts
therein.
At 1890 o'clock the tariff bill was taken
up, the pending question being the income
tax sections, and MIR Hill addressed the
Senate in opposition to the tax
Mr.. Hill read his speech from type
written sheets very slowly and in some
what solemn tones and manner. Close
attention was given to the speech on the
democratic side of the chamber, particu-
larly by the two New Jersey senators,
Messrs. Mcpherson and Smith, while the
republican senators, with very few excep-
tions, seemed TO take little or no interest
in it, Among Mr.. Hills most attentive
listeners on the floor of the Senate were
the three populist senators, Messrs. Allen,
Kyle and PETER. The galleries contained
quite large audience. Mr. Hill declined
to allow interruptions, stating his inten-
tlon TO take part in the dis
cussions of the various amend
ments. 1t took MIR. Hill just two hours
and forty-fve minutes to read his speech,
closing at 30 p. m. 1t was well under
stood.
THE PARTY DIFFERENCES.
Mr.. Hill held that there is enough of
honest difference in the party relating TO
the details of the tariff bill without
arousing further contention by such ex-
perimental scheme of taxation. Prudence
dictates that this congress should not at
tempt TO formulate new democratic doc
trines. He attacked the Presidents
nomination and the Senate's confirmation
of the negro Taylor and others in opposi-
tion, as he claimed, to the home rule
plank of the Chicago platform.
Senator Hill also referred to the re-
fusal of the House to repeal the federal
tax upon state bank circulation, such re-
peal having been expressly favored
in the national platform, and
claimed the income tax was the
Injecting of populist plank. He con.
tinued;
PROTESTING AGAINST REPUTATION,
"For one / protest against the repudi-
alton of the promises of the Democratic
party in order TO carry out the promises
of the populist party
The income tax was a war tax; ID had
never been approved by the votes Of the
people, and there was no genuine emer-
gency calling for its adoption.
"lt is unfair,n he asserted, "to those
who might desire to support the main
features of the appropriation or tariff
measure to be obliged TO accept ques-
tionable provision, foreign to the princi-
pal subject matter of the bill itself. or TO
record themselves in opposition to the
whole bill
"If democratic congress is to be per-
mitted to repudiate well-esta blished dem
ocratic principles and TO indorse new
ones without the sanction of a national
convention, and to compel their support
as a test of party fealty, we may next ex-
pect to hear of the adoption in a tariff
appropriation bill iof Henry Georges
single tax theory or a provision abolish
ing all custom houses and resorting to
direct federal Taxation instead of the
tariff for revenue or providing for the as
sumption of government control and
management Of all telegraphs, railroads,
and banks OF the country or the adOp-
tion of any other wild and visionary
scheme of socialism. paternalism, or
populism which majority may see fit to
sanction
He said, in conclusion, that the sena-
tors intended TO vote on the income tax
section, not according to their convic-
tions, but according to the decree of a
party caucus. He trusted that such a
humiliating spectacle would not be wit
messed. 1t was even boasted by some, he
said that the income tax was the best
feature Of the tariff bill. If that were so,
then he could only say, in the emphatic
language of the senator from New Jer-
sey-Mr. Smith-"God help the Demo
cratic party"
BIDDING FOR PoPULIsT VOTES.
The true statement of the case was
that populistic votes were preferred TO
democratic votes. He felt little personal
interest in the result He was getting
used to defeat in the Senate, and another
defeat was matter of supreme indiffer-
ence to him. But he would be false TO
to himself IL he did not raise his
warning voice and announce to his
fellow democrats and to the country
at large his conscientious and mature con-
viction on this subject in such great
crisis of the country's and the party's
history.
Mr. Higgins, rep, of Delaware, fol-
lowed with speech against the income
tax section.
THE ALLES-cHANDLER QUARREL.
Another installment of the Allen
Chandler quarrel was here injected into
the debate. Each of these gentlemen
grows daily more bitter toward the other,
on the floor of the Senate at least, and
both passed the lie and you're no gen
tleman" in parliamentary forms.
An argument against the income tax by
Mr.. Hoar followed.
At the close Of Mr.. Hoars remarks, an
amendment was offered by Mr.. Aldrch
TO change the limit for the existence Of
the income tax from Jan. ], 1900, to Jan. !,
1898. The amendment was rejected
yeas 20 nays SO, as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Aldrich, Allison. Chandler
Cullom. Davis, Dolph. Frye, GalhnRer, Haw-
ley, Higgins. Hoar, Lodge. Mcmillan, Nor
rill. Patton, Perkins. Platt. Power, Quay.
Sherman, Shoup and Washburn-22.
Nays--Messrs Allen. Bate. Berry. Blanch-
ard, Brice Ca1ery, Call. Cockrell, Coke, Du-
bois Faclkner. George Gibson. German,
Harris, Hunton, Irby Jarvis, Jones OF Arkan-
sas, Kyle, Lindsay. Mcpherson, Martin,
Mills, Mitchell Of Oregon, Morgan, Murphy,
Pasco, Pener, Pugh. Roach, Smith, Teller,
1nrpie, Vest, Villas, voorhees,, Walsh ana
White
THE FIvE-YEAR LIMIT ADOPTED.
The first committee amendment was
then agreed 10, without a division, fixing
the limit OF the tax at Jan. /, 1900
The next committee amendment was TO
A H.