Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-01-05
The INCOME TAX.
How Its Opponents Think It Can Be
Defeated.
NOT IN CAUCUS, But IN THE HOUSE.
What is Needed to Make a Major
ity Against It.
THE REPUBLICAN STAND.

"Will the republican members Of the House
vote from the same patriotic motives on
/ the income tax that they did silver re-
peal?'' asked a Star reporter today OF ex-
Speaker Reed
we snail vote from the same patriotic
motives as We always do" was the reply,
and I'm that We differ from our opponents,
but 1 do not know whether we shall vote
the same way. We do not feel like provis-
ioning the baggage train of our enemies"
1t Is generally inferred from these state
| ments of Mr. Reeds. and similar statements
by other republicans that they will not vote
TO strike the income tax provision out OF
the tariff bill. They probably will not vote
Tor 1t, except a few radical members from
the FAR west. but they will refrain from vot-
ing or split up SO to give no decisive
majority on either side Democratic mem-
bers from the east. however. propose TO
make fight against the income tax, both IN
the democratic caucus tonight and on the
floor Of the House. 1t is doubtful IL they
succeed In the caucus. I'm view Of the large
number OF western constituencies where
little would be paid under the tax. but they
believe success is easy on the floor IL the
republican members vote their convictions
Votes Needed for a Majority.
Fffty-one democrats are needed in a fun
House with the solid republican vote TO
make a majority of the House. There ap-
pears to be little doubt that the fifty-ons
can be obtained and perhaps a dozen or two
more to offset possible losses among the
republicans from the far west. New York
is counted on to furnish nineteen demo-
cratic votes against the income tax when the
existing vacancies from New York city are
filed New England will give nine such
votes. and New Jersey will probably add
five or six. Pennsylvania is not counted
upon so solidly, but is not likely to give
less than four of her ten democratic votes.
Ohio will probably give three democratic
votes against the income tax, and Maryland
three. Messrs. Rayne- and Rusk. who rep
resent the Baltimore districts were not
ready TO pledge themselves today. but Mr..
ttmore was against the tax. and that hto
own impressions were not favorable.
Southern Representatives.
Mai. Brawley of South Carolina is also
likely to swing into the opposition column.
although not yet prepared to commit him
SELF Judge Cobb of St. Louis is against tho
tax. and two of the democrats from Chicago
are likely TO join Gen. Black. the Repre-
sentative at large, on the same side. Col.
Oates of Alabama. Mr.. Breckinridge OF Ar
kansas. Judge Montgomery OF Kentucky
and several other members are also hostile
to the tax. but may feel Obliged to vote
with their delegations to keep IL In the bill.
The members OF the Louisiana delegation,
six in number, are not so much opposed to
the income tax as they are anxious to save
sugar. but II the substitution OF a duty
sugar is proposed as a means OF raising rev.
enue they Will undoubtedly give their six
votes in its favor. These states furnish
about fifty-fve democratic votes against the
income tax. without counting Mai Bra wiley,
Mr.. Breckenridge, Col Oates or Judge Mont
gomery. This does not begin to exhaust the
list of democratic members from which re-
cruits may be obtained against the tax.
Wilson May Vote Against IL.
Chairman Wilson himself is likely to vote
against 1t and carry the other three West
Virginia members with him. Pennsylvania,
Delaware. Ohio, Indiana, Minnesota, Illinois
and Michigan are also likely to swell the
opposition column. especially by the votes
of the members from the great commercial
cities of Cleveland. Columbus. st. Paul and
Detroit. The southern delegations have not
yet been much canvassed and are assumed
to be in favor OF the tax. but II will not be
surprising II men like Judge Patterson OF
Memphis, Richard II. Clark of Mobile, Gen.
Catchings Of Eicksburg and other members
of weight and influence array themselves
against the tax.
Republicans Cannot Refuse.
The anti-income tax democrats believe
that with the demonstration that they
have votes enough in the House TO xiii the
tax. the republicans cannot AFFORD to re-
fuse their assistance. The same sort OF
pressure from the public opinion OF ;hs
great republican states viii be brought 70
bear that was so effective in securing sill
yer repeal. and it will be pointed out that
II the republican party can benefit by demo-
cratic blunders on this question IL can only
he Eae nU ffS 0u-n EfrfS rlp of M
plicity in the laundering. Probably no re-
publican from Massachusetts,. New YORK.
Philadelphia, Cincinnati or Chicago will
dare do anything else than vote TO strike
the income tax out OF the bill, and they
will be relied upon to bring the great mass
of their party associates into line on he
same side.
Difficulty TO a Substitute.
One Of the difficulties the opponents OF the
tax have to face is agreement on a suit
able substitute proposition to provide reve-
nue. Members who may be willing to vote
against the income tax will hesitate to put
a duty back on sugar. and the entire re-
publican strength would be lost upon such
a proposition. There is no difficulty, how
ever in the opinion of the democrats who
are against the income tax I'm massing
their forces upon the single motion TO strike
out against the proposition 10 insert
the income tax i'm the bill. They can then
leave IL TO the ways and means committee.
with the recorded opinion OF the House be-
fore IL. that the income tax Is not wanted
to devise other means of raising revenue