New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-06-28

nation. and supposed that 1t must be an oversight
An amendment ought to be prepared, he said 10
remedy that injustice. He would vote for Mr.
AUson's amendment ito exempt corporations with
capital Of less than 100000 II he could get no bet
ter although that would not accomplish his own
purpose. lie asked the Senator from Missouri Chr
VesO if he had any suggestion 20 make TO cover
that point.
Mr. Vest Oem.. MOI stated some general propo-
stions as to a Tariff bill and said that his idea
Of taxation that it should be on property, on
income and in proportion to the protection when
Government actually gives to the citizen. The COM
mittee had endcavored to simplify the bill and TO
strengthen it by putting the tax directly on the
corporation and by allowing the corporation to
adjust its relations with stockholders. The COM
mittee treated the corporation as legal entity
The bill did not deal with stockholders; II dealt with
the corporation a legal being As 10 Mr. ALI
sons amendment Mr.. Vest said that II the Senate
should attempt TO discriminate between large and
small corporations 1t would enter into a labyrinth
from which there escape.
IMPOSSIBLE TO DISCRIMINATE.
Mr. Vest quoted a speech Of Senator sherman's
in ISL stating that income tax was the only tax
that tended to equllize The burdens Of the rich anI
OF the poor He also read an amendment suggested
some weeks ago by Mr.. Smith Of New-Jersey.
directing corporations II deduct the amount OF any
dividend paid 10 single stakeholder not exceeding
5000 from the amount which the corporations
pay the tax Such provision MI Vest
asserted would be impossible Of execution.
Mr. Allison remarked that II Mr.. Smiths amend
ment (as read by Mr.. NesD was adopted. it would
effect the purpose which he Mr. Allison) had IN
view.
But ne modified his amendment In some tar-
tlculars and argued in favor Of It, He knew per
fectly well that a perfect bill could not be framed;
but how could Senators, he asked Justify themselves
in making an arrangement which exempted stock
holders with an income of 5000 and mulctng those
stockholders whose income did not reach A.eo?
Noticing that Mr.. Harris dem, TENN was stand
ing as II prepared TO make a motion. Mr.. Allison
said: IF the Senator from Tennessee wants to move
TO lay my amendment the table Will with
draw IT,"
The Senator" Mr. Harris said in his usual slow
and impressive style anticipates my object.
rose for that purpose"
"Then / withdraw IT,"
So Mr. Allison's amendment withdrawn.
Mr. Teller Rep.. Col) rlilcuiel the sympathy
professed for the small stockholders OF corpora
TONS and intimatod that 1t was got up not In the
interest Of the small stockholders. but Of the large
ones II a small stockholder received an annual
dividend Of 500 he would erumbie at having %
pay tax OF 81 year Il, He hoped % see theinccm'
tax become a firm fixture in the monetary system Of
the United States. because II was the most equitable
and just system for the collection OF revenue that
could be devised by man.
providing that the income tax shall not Apply -
savings banks which do not 40 sraeral 'ccnn,ni
stock that IS a special guarantee fund t. III the
IL appealed to his colleague Alr White. DEM
T. use his niiu WIKI thr Democratic side Of the
chamber in favor Of the amendment
TENNEssEEs VOICE AGAIN HEARD.
Mr. Harris d)em Tenn was again seen to rise
slowly and portentousy. and Mr. Perkins appealed
to him not t. be so unjust to move - lay the
lrIe h IL il. he
petition Of 10000 people which he had just read
without. at least. hearing from the committee why
1t should not be agreed 70 -, III, u
marked. with severe tone and manner has al
ready heard from the senator from Cal,,fornia am
IS satisfied that the amendment shoud De A'H Oh
There IS another Senator from California. said
league. and the Senator has no rignt to refuse
NIT Tn - s.baf,r sad ~ Harris asserts his
right and makes the notion Rene"ei laugh
~ Perkins thereqEon whdrew his a ne
MI smith DeW J r ,mgn cIeTT baf an hour
before TO exempt the dividends Of small stock
h9laers) ana mae s"@ nn Motion ~ Mr Harris
rbe tbre. Popuiist senators Allen Kyle ana peg
fer and the Democratic senator from South Caro-
lima. Irby voted aye, and Mr. HI no. Mr. smith
Mr. Hn renewed Mr.. sml,hs ame3 q ne mod IL
fed to limit it 20 dividends OF Ss'"' ana ne
argued in support Of the amendment. .....
He said that Democrat he expected many
a time 10 address the people IN defence OF tie acts
on his side OF the chamber 70 let few merltoripus
provisions get into the pm snch az ne G1ul us
ify and not to close his mouth ehtlreV III REGARD
TO an the provisions Of the b'll 49,,
s11 Epljom 1Rep ms the vote was taken Mr.
HIPS amendment and the amendment was re-
MIR hin then offered the same amendment modi-
fed by limiting 1t to dividends no, exceeding 500.
This also. after remarks ny NJ A!dTlcH N''p"
r. ID, rejected-yeas, 81 nays a.
PARTNERSHIPS EXEMPTED
Mr.. Hoar (Rep. Mass) offered an amendment
excluding partnerships from the provision as to
corporations. Agreed to without division
Mr. Hoar then offered amendment for the
allowance TO corporations OF an exemPiqnb 'qn c
stockholders would be entitled in estimating their
After remarks by Nj Canery, Dem. La) the
amendment rejected-yeas, 70; nays, 81 , -
Amendment which he had offered before. modified
to an exemption Of $1,000 on dividends OF s'o'N-
Mr. Dolph Rep Ore) expressed opposition to
the income tax provisions OF the bill not Dc.duse
but because IT was intended 70 raise revenue by IL
which ought 10 be raised by duties on 1nnlpDI.ss.
thus protecting ana stimulating America" Industry
AM Mr Hi's last amendment was rejected as his
previous ones had been-yeas. % nays. 81 .
Mr. Allison Rep. Iowa renewed The Amendment
which he had already offered and withdrawn modi-
fed. however. as to exempt only all coIIgoral-
MI Tbandler 1k@p' r. H. declared that there
never was in this or in any other country, an IN
come tax on corporations There was none IN ne
law OF 1862. none IN the law Of lSSi ana none IN
the Wilson b 90 II came from the House.
Where, he asked, did the Senator from missouri
find It? Who helped him TO invent II? or ga ne
invent 1t out Of his own head? II was device or
the Senator from Missouri IN order TO make the
bin as unpopular as the wit OF man could make
1t. He (Mr. Chandler did not regret IT, ne ,, nil
not regret the unpOpularity Of the "dnmnable bill
He did not see how Senators on the other SIDE
could SIT stl day after day, and see snch, an
atrocous RECONSTRUCTED badly ventilated biil 90
through without trying to DO their duty as Scna-
tors and without trying 10 make a BIZ win aoIne
sort OF symmetry and some sort Of decency about
it, He repeated that there never hal been an IN
come tax levied corporations Ih"y were taxed
INT bv gpocial taxes This provision to make cor
porations pay an income tax was fearful bungie'
and II II passed II should he entitled "A clause
10 Increase the fees OF the lawyers because there
would be more litigation and more large fees In
connection with that wonderful discovery and In
vention OF the Senator from Missouri. In the