The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1909-06-30
MERELY INTENDED TO
SHUT OUT INCOME TAX
Continued from PAGE I.

sponded that he did not propose to be
caught in advocating a bounty. He
would not accept a bounty, he said, If
dollar a pound was offered. He was not
seeking any selfish advantage for South
Carolina. but wanted TO benefit the en-
tire country
With two mild speeches i'm favor Of
the duty by Senators Hepburn and Car
ter. which were much diluted with pro-
lection ingredients, the debate for
time was not especially animated, but
there was a slight warming up when
the Democrats began to align them
selves against the proposition of their
South Carolina colleague.
Senator McLaurin, the uncompromis-
ing Democrat, was the first TO oppose
il, as he did vigorously Senator Owen
added his voice in opposition, declaring
tea was now protected by the tea inn
porting monopoly which keeps the price
80 cents a pound higher than II would
be without that monopoly.
Senator Shively insisted that it was
faIacy to claim that the DEVELOPMENT of
the tea growing industry in this cOun-
try would be served by such duty and
was opposed to it.
A Republican vote from the south
was pledged to the duty as a protective
measure by Senator Bradley from Ken
lucky. while Senator Bailey gave 1t his
support purely as a revenue raising eX-
pedient, at the same time denOuncing as
unwarranted the taxing of any man to
make another mans business profitable.
Senator Stone offered an amendment
To prevent the duty applying to tea
sweepings." This suggestion was &C
cepted as a part of the amendment by
Mr.. Tillman.
Shifted to Income Tax.
While the question of tea remained
technically before the senate for a long
time, it was impossible 10 keep the in
come tax and the corporation tax ques-
tions entirely in the background. They
were referred to more than once, AMI at
one time so pOintedly by Senator Clay
as to bring out a most interesting state
meut from Senator Aldrich, who, as
chairman Of the finance committee, pre-
scented the corporation tax amendment.
Senators Bailey and Clay were prod
ding the chairman of the finance COM
mittee and appeared especially anxious
to know whether he would revise the
tariff schedules downward if the in
come tax amendment should be adopt
ed, to lower the revenue from customs
to an extent equal to that which would
be raised by the income tax. 1t was in
response to a direct question from Mr..
Clay that Mr.. Aldrich responded.
Admitted Truth of Charges.
Stating his position with reference to
the corporation tax, he said, bluntly: Il
shall vote for the corporation tax as a
means of defeating the income tax"
He added: Il shall be perfectly frank
in that respect. I shall vote for it for
another reason. The income Of the gov
eminent this year will show a deficit of
$50. 100000. Next year there will be a
deficit of $4,000 900. I am willing that
the deficit shall be taken care Of by a
corporation tax but at the end of two
years it should either be reduced to
nominal amount or repealed"
Mr.. Aldrich said he had not favored
as a permanent form of taxation "a tax
which is sure to destroy the protective
system"
II once catching up the words of the
senator from Rhode Island, Mr.. Bailey
declared MIR. Aldrich had announced
that his attitude in favOring a corpora
ton tax was a mere subterfuge.
Under the statement made by the
senator from Rhode Island" said Mr.
Bailey, those who favor an income tax
and not join them in this subterfuge to
defeat surely see what they are doing"
short-lived subterfuge.
I'VE are now told that this corpora
ton tax is to be entirely repealed, or at
least emasculated within the next two
years and see that, after all. it is sim
ply a contest between an income tax as
part of our fiscal system or a corpora
tion tax as a subterfuge to be continued
two years.
My support of the corporation tax"
replied Mr.. Aldrich, "is not subterfuge
in any sense Of the word. The corpora
ton tax is a tax on corporations, which
il is clearly within the right Of the con-
gress to impose, and those senators who
are honestly in favor of an income tax
that is constitutional and that can be
operated viii support the income tax
proposition Of the administration as
against the proposition of the senator
from Texas. which is certain. in the
minds Of the more thoughtful people, to
be unconstitutional"
Some One Converted.
The least thoughtful people" cor
rected Mr.. Bailey. Mr.. Bailey said the
president had once talked with him re-
specting the matter Of the income tax.
and he intimated that either the SEN
ator from Rhode Island had persuaded
the president, or the president had per-
suaded the senator from Rhode Island
along lines which formerly had not re- |
ceived the approval of the president.
But" added Mr.. Bailey, replying To /
Mr. Aldrich's denial Of the use of the
word "subterfuge," my direct authori- /
~ for saying this was a subterfuge IS the I
statement of the senator from Rhode /
Island that he would vote for a corpora
ton tax for the purpose of defeating an /
income tax. If that does not define a /
subterfuge, we viii need a new die !
tionary"
Again replying. Mr.. Aldrich said he /
favored an income tax only for times of /
emergency, and quoting the senator /
from Texas. declared the latter wished /
to use the tax as a means of DESTROYING /
the protective system.
A Republican Measure.
This proposition for a corporation
tax was made by the president of the
United States before the house commit
tee on ways and means prior to the time
we considered it here" said Mr.. AIdrjch
in further explanation Of the assertion
that there had been a change of front
which had brought forward the cor
poration tax as a subterfuge. II am