The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-02-26

Confederate soldier had a sweetheart. It.
1t was a right they took to themselves.
Mr.. Whitaker. of Wake, spoke yigor-
-ously for more liberal appropriations. He
declared it was disgrace to see old
Confederate soldiers at the county home,
as some of them were now. He thought
it all wrong that the pensions should so
only to those soldiers who were three
fourths disabled. The old soldiers were
fast disappearing, and we ought to care
for them.
Mr. Parker called the previous ques-
ton.
DR.. Alexander sent up an amendment
to put the date of marriage 1880, and not
to pay the county boards.
First amendment lost, and second one
adopted.
Mr.. Britain amended to 1868. Lost.
Mr.. Duncan amended to put limit Of
property at $1,000, instead of $500 Lost.
The bill as amended then was passed
by a rising vote, upon motion OF Mr..
Smith Every man in the Hall arose.
THE INCOME TAX.
The House then, on motion of Governor
Doughton, went into Committee of the
Whole for the further consideration of
the Revenue Bill.
Sections % and %. the income tax, were
again taken up, and Judge Graham sent
forward substitute for section %. con-
sisting OF the questions as set down in
the law of 1901, with the exception of the
one asking about income from United
States and State bonds.
Governor Dougnton considered that tho
great objection to the income tax last
year was on account of those questions
being too inquisitorial..
Judge Graham held that, if they caused
such a good revenue last year, they
ought to be continued.
MIR Morphew did not consider that the
questions would be objected to by any
body but tax-dodgers.
In reply to a question of Mr.. White. Of
Halifax, Gov. Doughton said he consider
cd that the proposed question would
elicit e more accurate answer.
Mr.. Drewry said the committee had
very carefully considered the question
Of whether the present from would bring
as much revenue as the former method
and the committee was almost unanimous
in its opinion that the proposed form
would elicit more accurate answers.
Moreover. there there had been a steady
increase in the revenue received from
this source for several years. Further =
more, it was considered unfair to put
those question to man whose income
was less than 81 900. Many would not
wish to advertise their incomes in that
way, young lawyers, for instance, and
no good was accomplished, as the State
did not tax incomes of less than 81 600.
Mr.. Gattis said it seemed to him a
doubtful expedient to change a feature
that had been so carefully considered
two years ago Put down in black and
white, the answer showed that this form
raised more revenue than ever before.
This form of questions had raised four
times as much as any form adopted be-
fore. He never had liked that feature
of the law himself, but it was a fact
when a man came to add up, he generally
found that he made more than he
thought. But he thought that section
providing for a fine upon the tax-lister
fine did not ask the questions should ne
stricken out because the list-taker knew
whether the man had an income of $1,000
or not.
Mr. Price. of Stanly, thought it was
just as easy for a man to lie about each
specific source of income as about the
whole thing.
General Davidson said it could be de-
tected easier, that was the difference.
NJ. Gattis asked why man was asked
say how many horses, cows, sheep,
&c. he had. instead of just Jumping mis-
whole property.
Mr. Newland asked Mr., Gattis why not
leave it altogether with the tax-Iistor
whether to ask the questionns at all or
not.
Mr.. Gattis said~that would suit him
DR.. Alexander, of Meckenburg, thought
it was best to let well enough alone
If the present law worked well, let it
alone
Mr.. Blount said that naturally the
class of people touched by the law
would kick The farmer was asked every
thing. But the professional man must
not be asked what his income is
Judge Graham's amendment was adopt
ed by q vote of 80 to 81.
Then section "a was taken up. It