The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-06-08
ZEE BusGNRAs nRAlNs o. fnK
DEMOCRACY.

fH8 BUsGNgAs BRAINS o. 1nB
DEMOCRACY.
The San rrancisco Examissv calls 40 10
account for the following statsmsnt:
'sUnitsd States senator Hill declares he
will hight the income TAI to the last ditch
In this determination Senator Hill u sup
ported By she Brooklyn Easis. perhaps the
abiest Democratic newspaper In the
United esatss; ~ the New York World,
the New York Essning Posf, the New York
Times, the Springfield Republicans. the Bos-
ton Herald, the Louisville Coariev-Journal.
the New York Sun; ths brains OF the
Democratic party are ell opposed 70 the in
come tax"
The Ezaminsv says:
mot . single paper in the above list ex-
cspt she New York Sss II . supporter Of
object 70 the income tax. The New York
World 10 IN ardent advocats OF thss tax. !"
The Posr-ISrsIraosscEn hes nsvsr said
that these papers supported hin and his
policy" it has oaly said thas they sup
ported him In his opposition 70 the income
tai. We were In error regarding the New
York World, but the New York Herald, an
independent Democratic newspaper OF 1t
lsast equal influence with the World, 10
bitterly opposed 70 the income tax. Let
~ look q The Demoeratic record In this
matter Of the income tax. The Brooklyn
Eagle says:
THE Eagle would rather have the Nc
Kiniey Law without IN income tai than
the Wilson bill with one. Ii Ii an outrage
on justice, equity and fair play. II -
monstrous proposition, II 10 one which,
apparently lsvslsd 81 the rich, would really
any amount would Be- collected by land
lords In increased rents, and by employers
from employees In DECREASED wages. II iss
scheme Of sectional revenge. The North
put down the rebellion. Its surviving
soldiers have bsen literally pspsioned.
The tax e intended ~ one OF reprisai on
the North, where the wealth ID. BY the
south. whence come most Of the votes for
such . tax. Such . bill IL neither Rspub-
fican nor Democratic. IL 10 Populist. Il
10 socialism. IL Ii the very next thing 70
communism. II 10 the reversal Of what
Americanism has stood for. Such tar 10
abhorrent. indefsnsibls. and ought TO b.
impossible"
This Is more Incorporating dsclsra-
ton of hostility to the income tar than
even Hill has yet made, and il - uttered
BY . Democratic journal that has never
been . Hill organ, like the New York Sun.
The New York Herald says:
The saddl,ng Of the abominable rider
on the tariff bill in the house was an igno-
minious and iuiquitous surrender Of
Democracy to Populism. Not less igno-
minious or UBIQUITOUS will be the surren-
DER in the senate IL the rider ID not cut Oh
and stamped out. Let the Democrats If
the senate hear from the country. Give
them To understand that the people will
not submit TO the Populist imposition, and
that IL must be cus from the tariff bill ct
all hazards"
The Rochester Union apd Advertiser,
Dem. says:
"As between the tariff bill as Il now
stands in the senate, with the income tax
for the creation OF so, 0oo, 900 surplus at
tached. and the Mckinley law. the people
prefer the latter. Rather no tariff act by
an income tax foisted upon it."
The Galveston Daily Neus says.
1T were better even to take the chances
measurable OF misrule OF the hands Of the
Republican party than TO stay with the
conditions moving with relentless steps to
abysm catastrophe In the comm unism
ot the Porulists and Socialists.' The Dem-
ocrasic party had better die and blow away
than TO keep within its ranks and nurse
into vigorous life the insidious spirit Of
communism and anarchy"
The same views are pronounced by the
New Haven Regiser DEM, which says:
More important even than the repeal
Of the odious Mckinley Law 10 the break
ing OFT of all intercourse between the
Democracy and the Popuiisss."
The Phiisdsiphia Record says;
Never from the time of jefferson to the
present hour has the Democratic party
Failed TO denouncs . Federal income tax a.
mischicyous and unconstitutional"
The Richmond. Va. Tsssss. Dem, says:
The whole argument for the Unfair in
come tax nov proposed oy the tariff btu 10
that the com narativsiy untaxed million
aires OF the country have got 10 bear fair
portion of the expense Of the government
But are . hundred dollars any more than
hundred dollars when in the possession
Of . millionairef Can any reason
founded In principle be adduced why a
hundred dollars in one man 3 b nds should
pay more taxes than y hundred dollars in
another mans handsf And If each hun
dred dollars In rich mans hands paws
exactly the same TAI that each hundred
dollars 10 poor mans hands pays. can il
be sad that the rich man fails 10 bear \
fair portion Of the expense Of govern
meatf
"When We pat . special tax upou
'nssIionsires' because they are million
asres' se turn our backs upon justice.
adopt communism fos our PHILOSOPHY.
and begin the reign Of privileged classes
IN place Of equality before the law. Il can
never be JUST or right that man With an
income Of $3.50 shall pay no tar, while a
man With IN income OF $1,000 shall nav
one. The poor man suffer- no injustice
when the rich rnAa pays the same rate
that he paya"
The New York sxs, DEM, says that isSs
more anxious 10 defeat President Cleve-
lands proposed income tax than /. il TO
secure any given kind Of tarsT. because s.sa-
stead of moving forward to Tho promised
land OF = tariff for revenue only. the reopse
Of thu Caiied States are to he dumped
into the Populist pis aud tied With are
Csn@Gaats' kxst pzinespss Q. industry