The independent. [volume] (Lincoln, Neb.) 1902-1907, 1903-11-12

y
Why? / am not IN favor of either.
Yet he would declare that protection
is the settled policy Of the govern
ment."
| have always been of the opinion
that nothing is. ever settled until ii Is
Sc tiled right, and unless Mr.. De Hart
and ali others who speak as he does
will first prepare the way and show
that the policy of protection is nat
ural and just and therefore right,
there is at least one pop
ulist who would never be led by the
false and hypocritical pretensions of
protectionists. ! have been "popul-
isticating' too long to swallow such
proposition, even though friend De
Hart does say that protection is pa
triotism"
Our friend admits that a tax levied
for revenue only" is mo higher to
the man Of wealth than to the man of
no property And | say the same is
true of protective tariff taxes and to
the same extent. Tariff taxes and ev-
cry other form of taxation levied up
On the things that the people must
use are taxes upon the poor and prop
ertyless out of all proportion to what
Is paid by the property man. Mr.. De
Hart seems to be radical for the in
come tax. An income tax might be
tolerated on the same ground that a
tax on prostitution may be, but for no
other reason. But even IL 1t can be en-
tirely justified, fundamentally, why
ri hot
principle of tarin taxes Is antngon-
istic to that OF the income tax? For
instance: A receiy es $1,000 per year.
1t will cost him that much to live. A
tax upon consumption (Which all tar
iff taxes are) would be tax upon
his entire income. b receives $10,-
600 per year. His necessary living
expense is no greater than AS; there
fore he escapes taxation upon nine
tenths of his income. Even from the
income tax standpoint, where lies the
justice of such a proposition?
The reason why tie peoples party
needs reviying is that 1t has already
followed after the old parties too
much. The exact opposite course must
be adopted. We must call attention
10 the fact that our government has
surrendered to private parties much
OF the sovereignty that was supposed
to reside in the people. To-wit: it has
granted franchises to railroad, tele-
graph and other corporations, which
convey to them the right of eminent
domain-an attribute of sovereignty.
1t has coined metals into money for
mine owners and made paper money
for favored banks, thereby giving to
private parties the entire control of
the volume of money-another sur
render of sovereignty. 1t has given
to political rings the power of MAX
ing laws that the people must obey
another surrender of sovereignty by
the people. And worst of ALL it has
pursued a policy of taxation Ia part
of which our friend would seek to
perpetuate) that taxes the food and
clothing and shelter of the people,
anL by this process has surrendered
the sovereign prerogative of taxation
and It's collection into the hands Of
the trusts and all commercial inter-
ests, for it makes these institutions
the collectors of the revenue. And all
these interests charge for their trou-
bic many times what it would cost
the government to collect it direct.
At the same time it has allowed the
only natural and legitimate source of
taxation to practically escape taxa
tion-that is land monopoly7and
thereby enabled land spectators to
levy upon the people an additional
tribute. 1t seeks every means of tax
alton except the only fundamentally
just one in order that the lord OF the
land may profit by injustice.
If the peoples party hopes to re-
viye 1t must look into this. 1t must
adopt policy that both the servile
| old parties have not dared TO adopt
1t must speak for human right and
natural justice-then its future will
not be.ln doubt. 1t must restore SOW
ereignty to the people-then the peo-
pie will rally to its standard.
l.. i OIIINBY