New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-01-12
PRICE THREE CENTS.
HILL RENEWS THE BATTLE.
KEEPING UP HIS ONSLAUGHT UPON THE
INCOME TAX.
MATTER TO THE NEXT coNGREsS.
HE SAYS. AND LET THE REPUBLICANS RE-
PEAL IT OR ENFORCE 1T. AS THEY
PLEAsE-GETTING BACK AT
MR.. COCKRELI.

Washington. Jan. 1.-THE debate in the Senate
to-day on the subject ri the income tax occu'
pied the better part of five hours. Most OF that
time was used by Mr. Hill Dem.. \. Y) in ad.
vocacy of the amendment offered by him. giving
courts of the United States jurisdiction to hear
and determine suits to test the constitutionality
and validity of the tax. He assailed the tax as
unequal. un-uniform and unjust, and expressed
his conviction that the senate would agree with
him that the provision as it now stood was un-
constitutional. unwieldy and unworkabe. and
that ii ought not to be inflicted on the taxpayerss
the Executive officer or Congress.
The Secretary of the Treasury in the dis
charge of his duty" sad Mr. Hill. has made
certain regulations for the collection Of this tax
10 which | propose to call the attention Of the
Senate and the country; nd this appropriation,
OF itself, draws the attention of the country
again to the Importance of this legislation. l
propose TO review certain of the considerations
that arise out OF it.
Mr.. Hill then went to read an argument
fortified by quotations from the writings OF
pubcists and the decisions of courts, to show
that an income tax is an excise tax; that by the
terms of the Constitution excise tax must be
uniform: and that the income tax provision In
the Tariff law is unequal, un-uniform and un-
Just 1t was not uniform. he declared, because.
under $4,000. He did not. he said. ask for a re-
peal Of the income tax law, as he recognized the
impossibiliy of having it repealed He should
simply crticise the Treasury regulations for the
assessment and collection Of the tax. And first
he called attention to the taxation of rents OF
real estate 1t was conceded he said that the
Congress had no power to lay tax on land and
call IL an excise tax. but tax on the income
from real estate virtually a tax on the real
estate itself. He denied the authority OF the
Secretary of the Treasury TO require citizens 10
make returns of the income derived from rents;
and he denied the authority of Congress TO tax
such income
The income tax provisions themselves he char
acterzed as "a slipshod piece of legislation"
The citizen had under 1t next TO no protection.
Just as the basis Of the levy of ad valorem
duties was an appraisement. so the basis Of the
levy Of an income tax was an apprasement. II
Congress should decide o. If courts should de-
eide that the repealed machinery Of former in
come tax laws was revived. so that refunds
could be made by the Treasury then the in
Vulnerable antiquities and contradictions of the
income tax law would produce pressure on all
departments Of the Government to get back tho
tax illegally exacted; and 1t would be very diff
cult even under the most careful regulations by
Congress. 10 retain tax against which the legal
profession Of the country was prejudiced. For
these reasons II seemed 10 be the duty of Con-
gress 10 reconsider the recent income tax legisla-
tion and to remove those antiquities; otherwise
it reasonably certain that the experience OF
the period as 10 the refund or the tax
would be repeated. Taxpayers and their agents
would besiege. the Treasury Department Con-
gress and the courts, claiming the refund Of tho
tax paid,
Mr. Hill was sure that the Senate would concur
with hirl in saying that the Income Tax law as Il
now stood unconstitutional. unwieldy un-
workable and that it ought to be inflicted in
its present shape. either on the taxpayers. the
executive officers. or Congress. The law had
been passed and he had expectation that this
Congress would repeal It. He continued:
put a stress on the word this Congress. It
is the Congress which enacted it. Now there
comes appropriation 10 carry ii out. concede
the general rule to be that there ought to be an
appropriation To carry out every existing law,
duly enacted. / have always been believer IN
that doctrine. Still there may be occasions when
ii is the duty of Congress 10 withhold an appro.
priation 10 execute law that affects the life and
liberty OF the citizen or affects the rights OF great
political parties That is a power which is exer-
cised only once in fifty or 100 years by the House
OF Commons in England. In asserting the right
and majesty Of the people suggest however.
that the objections which have been raised 10 this
appropriation require some additional egisla ton.
think 1t is our duty to pause and reflect and see
what We have enacted. You recolect the closing
days Of the debate the Tariff bill. You
were passed over. The necessity of action
on the par; Of political party was APP
parent. This Income Tax law has never
been enforced. 1t is an existing statute, it is true.
but for all practical purposes and effts Is Just
now going ON the statute book. Ii was inserted
as the price Of tariff reform and condition why
Senators would support the Tariff bill. The Sena-
tor from Kansas (Mr. Peffer was right yesterday
when he assumed the championship of this APP
preparation. 1t is 10 carry out principle OF his
party-not of the Democratic party nor Of the Re-
puh
10 come forward the chief representative of
this tax. He said II one Of the chief prin-
cIples Of his party; and he congratulated himself
and his party that IL formed part OF the statutes
of the country. II never has been declared to be
a Democratic principle by any National conven-
tiOn Of the party.
The senator from Missouri (lir. CockrelD saw
fit yesterday to speak of the results Of the recent
elections and he referred TO the fact that In the
state Of NewYork the income tax was disap-
proved in the Democratic platform and that the
candidates that platform were defeated
point him to the fact that the same disapproVai
OF the income tax was in the Republican PLATFORM
Of New-York. So far as that State Is concerned.
there and there Is but little difference OF
opinion on that subject But so Interested was
the Senator in the affairs Of my state In respect
to this income tax that he forgot to mention the
fact that In his own State or missouri the Demo-
cratic convention adopted platform favoring the
income tax; and he did not speak OF the result OF
the election there G.aughter) | should not have
referred to the recent elections as bearing upon
this question II it had not been dragged into the
debate by The distinguished chairman OF the Conn
mittee on Appropria tions I think that no Demo-
crat finds very much consolation in referring TO
the result in NewYork, Missouri. or any other
State last fall Republican laughter) We must
walt until the clouds roll by; and suppose that
at some future time the prospects Of our party
will revive do not know single State where
the cause OF the party was aided by the insertion
Of this income tax in the Tariff law.
II we are to accept the verdict Of the people
last fall as conclusive our Republican friends
would argue for the condemnation of the income
tax for the condemnation Of the Wilson German
Brice- Somebody bill. whatever II was Qaughter),
and for the condemnation of all our legislation
Of last year: and think that the less We have
to say about II our side at this particular
time the better. | suggest the query whether
the situation now may not be somewhat different