The Portland daily press., 1895-01-17
WASHINGTON NEWS.
Urgent Deficiency Bill Passes the
Senate
SUPREME COURT WILL RENDER
DECISION ON INCOME TAX.

| DECISION ON INCOME TAX.
| A Resolution of Impeachment Against
| Judge Ricks is Being Prepared-Perti-
| nent Remarks by Mr. Reed in the
| House,
Washington, January 16.-In the SEN
ate, after the transaction of unimportant
business, the urgent deficiency bill was
taken up, ana Mr.. Hill of New York ad
dressed the Senate in regard to the rul-
ing out of his amendment giving United
States courts jurisdiction of the ques-
tion of the constitutionality and validity
of the income tax. Mr.. Hill said he
questioned the right of the Senate, with
! due regard to it's rules, to refuse consid-
Grafton to hisFamendment. The point he
made was that the pending bill was not
an appropriation bill within the mean
| ing of the rule. 1t is not one Of the reg
ular appropriation bills. 1t is not even
regular annual deficiency bill.
l
| MIR. Hill to say, as it was he who made
| the point of order against the amend
ment, he WAS willing to withdraw it
and let the Senate vote on the amend
| ment.
"And deprive me OF my right to go on
with my Speech" Mr.. Hill asked.
II will withdraw thespoint after the
| Senator has made his Speech" Mr.. Nor
| gan said.
Mr.. Hill proceeded with his argument,
sustaining it by reference TO various de-
| cisions in both houses, and showing such
bills as, for instance, the pensions ar
| rears bill, or the river and harbor bill,
were not general appropriation bills un-
| der the rules.
| Mr.. Vest of Missouri said: ut has
| never been the custom of the Senate to
| legislate for the purpose OF affecting ex-
| isting litigation, and neither branch OF
Congress should indulge in that practice
| yet suit at this moment is being argued
| in the supreme court of the District OF
[ Colum bia involving the constitutional
| ity of the income tax.
| Mr.. Vest defended the finance commit
| tee and himself as mem ber OF 1t, from
| the responsibility for the imperfectlons
| of the income tax provision. He declared
| the provision as it came from the House
| was infinitely more drastic than tnat
contained in the present law. he men
4
TAXATION OF SAVINGS BANKS
in the House proposition. Mr.. Vest said
he was largely responsible fsr the. form
/ in which the income tax provisicns now
stood. He did not claim it was perfect.
or anything like perfect. He asserted
it's imperfections were caused by the
| fact that in the absence of rules in the
| Senate TO close debate, the finance COM
| mittee was compelled to put tie tariff
bill through under whip and spur. The
| entire country, he said, was clamorlng
| for tariff legislation. Those who had
| charge of the measure endeavoreo 20
| make the income tax as unobJect1onable
| as possl BILE. There had been grave de-
fects left in it, and it had been hoped
that those defects wGald be reformed i'll
the conference committee. The differ
eences between the House and Senate
in relation to the income tax were taken
IN and referred to MIR. Mcmillan Of Ten
nessee and myself and weworked night
| and day for more than week, and I'm
ally came to conclusion. Just as we
succeeded in doing so and while we were
| considering an entirely different portion
of the tariff bill, action was had by the
Senate. which resulted in tie vote on
the question of discharging the confer
ence committee, and the House of Rep
resentatives then accepted all the amend
ments of the Senate to the tariff bill.
The condition in which we, find our.
selves today is simply one of the incl
dents coming naturally from the want
of rules in this body.
Mr.. Vest drifted into a discussion of
| the rules.
that the tariff bill was much benefited
| reufa in,
the Senate; the country was benefited
by it: and so was the gentleman's own
MI. Vest said: II assert that the most
vicious, dangerous and utterly indefin-
able feature OF the absence OF rules to
close debate is the fact that it gives the
minority the power of threatening those
and untimely action.
Mr.. Vest said he did not believe the
Seer etary of the Treasury or any other
man could make an intelligent conJec-
ture as to the future revenue of the gov
ernment. The estimate OF the revenue
from the income tax was thirty millions
but he believed it would be in the neigh
borbood Of eighty or an hundred million.
Mr.. Vest drifted into a discussion of the
differential duty on sugar, and asserted
the revenues would be largely affected
by retaliation unless that differential
After further discussion, Mr.. Cockrell
| of Missouri asked for a vote on the ques-
tion of order, Shall the decision of the
Chair stand as decision of the Senate?"
MIR. Quay Of Pennsylvania objected to
the withdrawal of the appeal. On yea
and nav vote the decision of the Chair
was sustained, 40 toe
Mr., QUAY again offered an amendment
bv adding at the end of the bill pro-
vision that nothing in the law should
preclude any court having jurisdiction,
from hearing proceedings to .est the
constitutionality or validity of the act.
Mr.G of Delaware raised a point OF
order against il, and the chair, Mr.. Gal
linger Of New Hampshire, sustained the
Mr.. Lodge of Massachu setts offered ar
amendments placing officials authorized
to be appointed for the income tax in
the civil service.
Mr." "Cockrell of Missouri moved to lay
Mr.. Lodges amendmgent on the table
and the motion was agreed to, yeas a.
nays II.
ANOTHER ATTACK.
1 Of pannsvlyan;o -o,n,rad h Il