The times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1882-1897, 1894-03-02
AGAINST INCOME TAX
EAGER OPPOSITION OF the DEMO.
CRATIC PRESS THERETO.

prived of His Wages, So Let the Rich
Also He Taxed.
Immediately after the Democratic
administration assumed control of the
affairs of government being supported
by a majority of the Democratic party
in both houses of congress, the necessity
occurred to the leading Democratic pa.
pers of the country to forestall by some
means what they knew would be the
inevitable consequences of Democratic
control. History had shown that when
ever the Democratic party had exclusive
control in administering the affairs of
government, the United States'was in
variably, without any exception what
ever, plunged into condition of dire
distress to labor, to producers and man
ufacturers, caused by money panics,
souphouses and starvation.
Efforts have recently been made to
mislead the press and to deceive the peo-
pie upon the subject of the income tax
which the Democratic administration
may find itself compelled to impose as
a means for acquiring revenue in order
to meet the deficiency brought about by
the diminished customs receipts through
their farcical tariff for revenue only.
and which is not tariff for revenue by
any means, and to meet the deficiency
brought about by the increase of ex-
penditures above receipts of govern
ment. A tariff for revenue only is a di-
rect tax upon the people; therefore, why
should it not be followed up by other di-
rect taxation, and why should not these
taxes be levied upon those who stre best
able to pay them? Let the bulk of the
taxes be paid by those who can afford
to live in luxury, who have wealth, and
who do not have to bother themselves
with such small matters as providing
for the morrow.
The history of the present Democratic
party, since March A, 1898, has shown
that it is distinctly and most decidedly
the party that favors and has regard to
the interests of the rich. High and i'm.
portant public offices have been openly
bartered for money and bought by the
rich. The new tariff bill even shows
favoritism for the rich in reducing the
duty upon foreign champagne and upon
foreign cigars, but what has the Dem
ocratic party during 1898 done for the
poor man, for the wage Garner, for the
man dependent upon his daily toll for
the means wherewith to supply food and
clothing for his family?
The only change that has been no
ticed by the great majority OF the peo-
pie, who are the wage earners and pro-
drcers, is that the opportunity for earn
ing wages has been taken from them,
that their pay has been cut down, or
that they are earning no money at all.
AS the poorer classes have thus received
this delicate attention at the hands of
the present Democratic administration,
therefore let the income tax; by all
means be imposed. 1t is not fair that
the rich should not receive their share
of administrative favors, or that they
should not suffer some loss the same as
the poor classes.
This opposition to the imposition of
an income tax rests entirely and exclu
sively upon the Democratic party of the
country, which represents the rich and
misrepresents and disfavors the poor.
James Gordon Bennett of the New York
Herald makes his money in this coun-
try, but spends it in Europe, where he
lives. Mr.. Pulitzer of The World is of
German birth and lives largely abroad.
The proprietor of the New York Times
will not even patronize American la
Dor and industries, but buys his print
ing presses in England. The Evening
Post of New York, an able English adj
vocate, has been owned by foreigner,
who has just left the country, taking
several millions of dollars of American
money with him, after banqueting the
president and his friends at $40 per
plate dinner. These are the people who
should pay an income tax, but these are
the people who are vigorously opposing
1t.