The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-01-12


cusses Currency and silver
washington, Jan. II Practically tbs
whole of the days session was occupied
Ia the discussion of Mr.. HIS arnend-
rnent to the urgency deficiency bill
designated to afford an opportunity 70 8
test the constitutionality of the iilsoTn5
tax law. afr. Hill delivered long and
carefully prepared speech in suDpofhs0f
his amendment. Mr.. Dubois, eSep.]. OF
Idaho. followed in support Of the ap-
preparation to make the law operative
but soon drifted into a discussion the
silver question in which he said thar
no currency hill could pass that vas
not liberal towards silver.
Mr.. Quay supported Mr.. HIS amend
ment and said it would be the duty of
the next Republican Congress to repeal
the law. Messrs. Sherman, of Ohio, and
Mitchell, of Oregon, thought the apprp-
'priatfon should be made. Before adj
journment Mr.. Morgan, Dem9, OF Ala
bama. raised. and the char sustained
a. point fsorder against the amendment
from which Mr.. Hill appealed end az
NlOn Oil t1iS Will DC lt1U tIlAlJHtOfff.
The Senate took up the urgent de-
ficiency bill aud Hill. Of New York.
spoke in behalf of his amendment to
allow am opportunity To test its con-
stitutionaIfty.
Hill said that he knew nothing that
had taken place since he was a mem
Der of the Senate that justified the
senator from KANSAS i'm charging that
this bill was to meet with dlibusterinS
as far as ne WAS cOnCerffefl
4 PETER declared he had not used the
word f1libusteEing since he had been a
member OF the Senate. He had said
the senator from New York and the
senator from Pennsylvania Quay had
made up their minds to defeat the COLI
their power 10 do SO. a-1d the amend
ment proposed lbE them EFas the first in
that proceeding.
Hill first argued against the conStis1-
-tlonahty OF the law and referred to the
exemption of classes. He asked where
had Congress the right toSsexenlpt a.
class? He did not ask that the law hA
repealed this session. He recognized
thai as iInp05sIble; nor did he asIS-its
tfeDeal because II was not lanDortioned
kaccQTdlng TO the last census He At
tackled the regulations of the treasure
Tor the collection Of taxes and said f1e
was competed 70 protest against the
treasury interpretations of law and the
llnterJectlon therein of Observation-Disclosures.
not contemplated by the senators. Ha
was WITHIN the bounds when he cbars.--
terlzed the future of the pending bill
relating to the income tax as a slin-sbo5
arrangement. Under it citizens had mn
/ protection. ~
Ambiguity in the Law.
! Another serious ambiguity in the law,
was what assessment or whose assess
ment is to be final? Is the taxpaves~ r.,
nave any appeal or the commissioner
| mere was nothing in any section of
the income tax law of 1894 that auth
orlzed a suit against the tax collector
OF any one else to recover back taxes
Illegally eXacted. This, me asserted
was one Of the most important uues-
lions in this discussion. He asked
where in the present law was theirs
! any power given to any commissioner
OF OF, internal revenue or to any other
ofncer to return taxes enormously col
| leCted
Mr.. Hill spoke of how hard it would
be to maintain a law to which the le-.
| gal profession was opposed, and of
now the money involved would be en-
listed in the service of the LOBBYISTS
and lawyers at both ends of PennsIv
Xanla avenue. 1t was the duty of the
Senate to remove the antiquities in
the law while the matter was before
IL
IF the antiquities in the law were
not removed it was reasonably GER
tain the experiences connected with
the direct taxes of the war period and
its refund would be repealed. Tax
payers would beseige the treasury. the
court of claims, and Congress for a re-
fund of the tax.
The senator also questioned the right
of Congress under the Constitution to
tax the income from notes, bonds or
other securities issued by states or
minor divisions of states. The income
tax was not for securing revenue only.
but to harrasS and worry and, he
asked, Shall the inquisitoriaI forms
proposed by the treasury department
be tolerated by Congress? The great
newspapers of New York City were or
ganized as corporations under the New
York laws and must return their an
nual profits and pay 2 pei. cent. there
on.
+ Statement of Profits.
Why. the senator asked. could not
the government be content with p.
plain, trustworthy statement of the
annual net profit of the enterprises.
Many of the questions put forward in
the treasury regulations had no war
rant in the law unless the law en-
powered the department to put any
QUCotIOi IL pIcdSGI- AldIy Oh IQe Qu9S-
tons We're absurdly inquisitorial He
had no expectation that this Congress
would repeal the law now An appro-
tpriation was wanted to carry it out. He
concluded the general rule to be that
there ought to be an appropriation to
carry out existing laws. He mad al
ways been a believer in that doctrine
The question had been suggested
whether this appropriation was taken
out of the ordinary rule. The statute.
had never been enforced. 1t existed in
1.-THE statutes, it. was true. but for all
practical purposes and effect the law
was just going on the statute books.
1t was insisted on as the price of leg
isldtion and as a, condition why sena-
tors should support it.
Not Democratic Measure.
Mr. Hill reminded the. Senate that
he had said the income. tax proposition
had been placed in the bill to suit GER
tain senators, certain members of Con-
gress, not to carry out a. single Demo-
cratic doctrine. 1t had never been de-
clared to be a Democratic doctrine by
any national convention of the party.
Mr. Hill then referred to the re-
marks of Mr.. Cockrell, when ne al
luded to the facts that the candidacy
of the last Democratic New York state
convention was defeated. He Child
would point out to the senator the
fact the same disapprOval of the in
come tax (as that contained in the