Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1896-08-21

pirate to their own use the proceeds of the
toll of others. The commandment, Thou
shalt not steal " thundcrcd from Sinai and
reiterated in the legislation Of all nations,
is no rcspectcr of persons. 1t must be APP
Piled to the great as well as the small, to
the strong as we'll as TO- weak, to the cor
poratc person created by law as we'll as to
the person Of flesh and blood created by
The Almighty. No government is worthy
of the name which is not able to protect
from every arm upiftcd for his injury the
humblcst citizen who lives beneath tho
flag. it follows as necessary conclusion
that vicious legislation must he remcdicd
by the people who suffer from the effects OF
such legislation and not by those who en-
joy it's benefits
The Income Tax Decision.
The Chicago platform has been con-
demncd ny 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 recog-
nize the binding force of that decision so
long as it stands as part of the law of
che land. There is in the platform no sug
gestion of an attempt to dispute the au-
thOrity of the supreme court. The party is
simply pledged to use "all the constitu-
tional power which remains after that de-
cision or which may come frCRn its reversal
by the court as it may hereafter be consti-
tuted.'l Is there any disloyalty in that
pledge? For a hundred years the supreme
court of the United States has sustained
the principle which underlies the income
tax. Some 90 years ago this same court
sustained without n dissenting voice an in
come tax law almost identical with the
one recently ovcrthrown. Has not future
court as much right to return to tho Judi
cial presidents of century as the present
court had to depart from them? When
courts allow rehcarings, they admit that
error is possible. The late decision against
the income tax was rendered by majority
of one after rChearing.
While the money question overshadows
all other questions in importance, l 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
government more cquitably among those
who enjoy the protection of the govern
ment At present the expenses OF the fed
cral government, collected through internal
revenue taxes and import duties are espe-
cially cumbersome upon the poorer classes
of society. \ law which collects from some
citizens moro than their share of the taxes
and collects from other citizens less than
their share is simply an indirect means
of transferring one man s property to an
other man S pocket. and while the process
may be quite satisfactory to the men who
escape just taxation it can never be salts
factory to those who are OVCrburdened.
The last income tax law, with its exemp-
ton provisions, when considered in con-
nection with other methods of taxation in
force, was not unjust to the possessors of
large incomes, because they We're not COM
PEELED to pay total federal tax greater
than their share The income tax is not
new, nor is it based upon hostility to the
rich The system is employed in several
of the most important nations of Europe,
and every income tax law now upon the
statute books in any land, so far as / have
been able to ascertain, contains an cxemp-
ton clause. While the collection of an in
come tax in other countries does not make
it necessary for this nation to adopt the
system, yet it ought to moderate the Ian
guage of those who denounce the income
tax as an assault upon the we'll to do.
Not only snail refuse to apologize for
I
national convention, but shall also refuse
to apologize for the exercise by it of the
right to dissent from decision of the SUI
preme court. In government like ours
every public official is a public servant,
whether he holds Office by election or by
appointment, whether lie serves for term
of years or during good behavior, and the
people have a right to criticise his official
acts. " Confidence is everywhere the parent
of despotism. Free government exists in
| jealousy and not in confidence. These are
| the words of Thomas jefferson, and / sub
NIT that they resent truCr conception of
| popular government than that entertained
| by those who would prohibit an unfavor-
able comment upon n court decision.
| Truth will vindicate itself. Only error fears
free speech. No public official who con-
scicntiously discharges his duty as he sees
it will desire to deny to those whom he
serves the right to discuss his official con-
duct.
The Paramount Question.
Now let me ask you to consider the para
mount question of this campaign - the
money question 1t is scarcely necessary to
defend the principle of bimetallism. No
national party during the entire history of
the United States has ever declared against
1t, and no party in this campaign has had
the temerity to oppose it, Three PARTIES
the Democratic, Populist and Silver par
ties-have not only declared for bimetal-
lism, but have outlined the specific legisla-
ton necessary to restore silver to its an
cient position by the side of gold. The
Republican platform declares that bimetal-
lism is desirable when it pledges tho Re
publican party to aid in securing it as soon
as the assistance of certain foreign nations
can be obtained Those who represented
the minority sentiment in the Chicago con-
vention opposed the free coinage of silver
by the United States by independent ac-
ton on the ground that, in their Judgment,
1t "would retard or entirely prevent the
establishment of international bimetal-
lism, to which the efforts Of tho govern
ment should be steadily directed" When
they asserted that the efforts of the govern
ment should be steadily directed toward
the establishment of international bimetal.
! liSm, they CONDEMNED mODOmetalliSm