The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-01-12
IN TIE SENATE.
Hill Makes Strong Argument Against
the Income Tax.


the Income Tax.
Washington City. Jan. 1.-THE senate
tcak UP the urgency deficiency hall assi
IIsn spoke IN behalf Of fas anTensimens 10
allow an opportunity to test the consti-
sutIofaalsty OF the income tax.
Hgil said he knew of ngs hing that had
taken place since be was member OF
the senate that justified the senator from
Kansas In charging that this bill was 10
meet with tilsbuster9ng 50 far as he was
concerned.
PETER aeciaresl he had not used the
word fiihiisse~snS since he had been a
member % the ssaalse. He saa1 that the
senator from New York and the senator
from Pennsylvasaia tQuayl had made up
rEsair minds TO defeat collection of the
income tax IL I'm their power TO do So
The amendment proposed by them was
thu first step IN that psocecsigng.
HA SAID a ssersJas ambiguity In the in
come tax law was what assessrnauf or
WHOSE assessment Is TO be final Is the
taxpayer to have any appeal. or the COM
missioner There was nothing IN any
section OF the income uax law OF 1884
that authorized a suit against the tax
collector or any one else 10 recover back
taxes illegally exacted. Ts3S. ne assert
Ell. was ore Of the most important ques-
tiorKs IN this discussion. He asked where
n the present law was there any power
gwen to any commissioner of gasernal
revenue or TO any other officer, 10 return
taxes erroneously collected.
Hill spoke OF how hard II woahi be to-
masmsain a IAN 10 which the legal pro-
fession was opposed, and OF how the
3
service of the lobbyists and The lawyers
ct both ends OF Pennsylvania avenue. II
u-afg 1a~yYsTfy Of the senate 10 remove the
antiquities IN the law while the matter
was before il. If the antiquities In the
: law were NOT renewed. IT was reasonably
certain the experiences conaaected with
the direct tax of tsre war period and its
refund woultt be repeated Taxpayers
would bessege the treasury. the court OF
: claims and congress for refund of the
sax.
The senator also questioned the right
OF congress under the constitution 10 tax
tho income from notes. bonds or other
securities. ISSUED by states OF minor di-
visions Of states. The income tax was not
for securing revenue only, bur TO bar
rass and worry, and, he asked. ssfail
thu inquisitorlal forms proposed rs the
treasury department he tolerated In con-
grass?'' TIE great newspapers Of New
York city were organized as carTanrs lions
under the New York laws, and mast re-
turn their annual profits and pay per
cent. thereon. Why. the senator asked.
could not the government be content
with 4 plain. Trustworthy statement of
the annual ncs profits ef the enterprises2
Many Of the questions put forth In the
treasury regulations haa no warrant in
the law unless the law empowered the
department. to put any question Il
pleased Many Of the aaestlaEs were alb
s1rdly inqulsitoriaL
He had no expectation thai this con-
grees would repeal The law new. An ap-
preparation was wanted 10 carry II out
He conceded the general rule To be that
there ought 20 be an appropriation 20
carry out existing Laws. lie bad always
been a believer in thai doctrine. The
question had been suggested whether this
appropriation YVES rast taken cut of the
ordinary rule The ssatnfe had never
iseen enforced. II existed in the statutes.
I. waas true. but. fer all practical ps1F-
roses and effect. the law was just rgsug
as the price of legislation and as a con-
sg4son why senator's should support t.
uift rrrYAsYr1ssz the seEsaae that he had
said the income tax proposition ke3 been
p,aes~a i'm the bill to please certain sersa~
tors. certain members OF eossgrgsz, not
~ carry on. a single Degso1ratsc doc
trfae. Tt had never he@n declared 10 he
q Democratic soesrsne by any rational
convention ef the parry.
ffas then referred - ths remarks of
f.gsskr~sl. wtea he assssiesf 20 the fact
that taa candidates - the last New fask
TscasScrsasse state CONVENTION were tss-
tested. lie gIfsEs wuass3 Es0ist oaf so the
senator she fact tAst tbs same eilsaFSrso-
val Of sae Income sax as taat contained
in she psatsssrsss oS the Democratic c4sn-
g@x.issgs was aiso in the Keassssaasean state
r.sasgorrr. So Tar a. lfse state of SeE
york s&s concerned. there vss an1 h
bat little difference CT ossfnsaa ea tie
sssssssre. TIRE snrsaar from Mss@oars bad
sarspst=zs 60 rnenssa8 thar In haa state
th@ Democratic convsafsoz favored tns