Semi=weekly graphic. (Pine Bluff, Ark.) 1895-1902, 1896-08-15


noninterference VIXEN great aggregations
of wealth are trespassing upon the rights
OF individuals. We welcome such oppo-
sition. it is the highest endorsement which
could be bestowed upon us We are con-
tent to have the cooperation OF those who
desire to overcome the government admin
istration without fear or favor lie IS not
the wish of the great public that trusts
should spring into existence and override
the weaker members of society; tits not tie
wish of the general public that these trusts
should destroy competition and then col
lect such taxes as they will from those who
ara AT their mercy. nor is it the wish OF the
neral public that the instrumentalities
of COVE aHirnt have been so often prostl-
tut do purposes of private gain. Those
who stand upon the Chicago platform be-
lieye that the government should not only
avoid wrong doing, but that it should also
prevent wrong doing and they believe that
the law should be enforced alike against
all enemies of the public veal They do
not excuse petit larceny, but they declare
that grand larceny is equally crime they
do not defend the occupation OF the nigh
wayman who rObs the unsuspect1ng tray
eler. but they include among the trans
gressors those who, through the more po-
lite and less hazardous means OF leglsia-
ton appropriate to their own use the pro
ceeds OF the toll of others The command
ment '"rhou shalt not steal, Numbered
from Sinai and reiterated in the legislation
of all nations, is no respeeter of persons. 1t
must be applied to the great as well as the
SMALL to the strong as well as the weak;
to the corporate person created by law as
well rs to the person of flesh and blood Gre
ated by the Almighty. 1t follows as
a necessary conclusion that vicious legis-
lation must be remedied by the people
who suffer from the effects of such leg
islaton and not by those who enjoy its
benefits.
The Chicago platform has been con
demned by some because it dissents from
an opinion rendered by the supreme court
declaring the income tax law unconstitu-
tional Our critics even go so far as to APP
ply the name anarchist to those who stand
upon that plank of the platform. 1t must
be remembered that we expressly Feeog-
nize the binding force of that decision so
long as it stands as part of the law of the
land There is in the platform no sugges-
ton of plan ofan attempt to dispute the
authority of the supreme court. The par
ty is simply pledged to use AL the constr
tutional power which remains after that
decision or which may come from its re-
versal by the court as 1t may hereafter be
constituted Is there any dislOyalty in
that pledge?
For 100 years the supreme court Of the
United States has sustained the principle
which underlies the income tax. Some 20
years ago this same court sustained, with
out a dissenting voice, an income tax law
almost identical with the one recently
oYerthrown Has not a future court as
much right to return to the judicial
presidents Of century as the present
court has to depart from them? When
courts allow rehearings they admit that
error is possible. The late decision against
the income tax was rendered by majority
of one after a rehearing
While she money question overshadowa
all other questions in Importance | desire
it distinctly understood that l shall offer
no apology for the income tax plank OF
the Chicago platform. The last income tax
law sought to apportion the burdens OF
the government more equitably among
those who enjoy the protection of the
government. At present the expenses of
the Federal government, collected through
internal revenue taxes and import duties,
are especially burdensOme upon the poorer
classes of society. A law which collects
from some citizens more than their share
of taxes and collects from other citi-
zens less than their share is simply an in
direct means of the transferring of one
mans property to another mans pocket;
and while the process may be quite salts
factory to the men who escape just taxa
ton, it can never be satisfactory to those
who are overburdened The last income
tax law with its exemption provisions,
when considered in connection with other
methods of taxation in force, was not I'M
just to the possessors of large incomes be
cause they were not compelled to pay to-
tai Federal tax greater than their
share. The income tax is not new, nor is
based upon hostility to the rich. The
system is employed in several of the most
important J ttions of Europe and every in
come tax law now upon the state books in
any land, 80 far as | have been able to as
certain, contains an exemption clause.
While the collection of an income tax in
other countries does not make it necessary
for this nation to adopt the system. yet
1t ought to moderate the language of those
who denounee the income tax as an assault
upon the well to do. Not only shall re
come tax law by the national convention,
but | shall also refuse to apologize for the
exercise by it Of the right to dissent from
decision Of the supreme court. Ia gov
eminent like ours every public official is a
public servant, whether he holds office by
election or by appointment, whether he
serves for a term of years or during good
behavior, and the people have a right to
eriticise his official acts Confidence is
everywhere the parent of despotism; free
government exists in jealousy and not in
eontidence-these are the words of Thomas
jefferson and / submit that they present
truer conception Of popular government
than entertained by those who would pro
hiDib ah unfa 0rabie comment upon
court Of decision. Truth will vindicate it,
self; only error fears free speech. No pub
lie official who conscientiOusly discharges
his duty as he sees il will desire to DENY to
those whom he serves the right to discuss
his official conduct
The Money Question.
Now let me ask You to consider the mar.
amount question TT this eampalen-the
money question. IL is scarcely necessary
20 defend the principle Of bimetallism.
No national party during the entire history
Of the United States has ever declared
against &c, and no party ga this campaign
has had the temerity to oppose IT, Three
parties, the Democratic populist aud Sit
yer parties, have not only declared Tor BIZ
metallism, but have outlined the specific
legislation necessary 10 RESTORE silver Ia its