Gilpin observer., 1909-07-22
Makes Attitude Clear.

This tax hits the little fellows, and
allows the Carnegie's and Rockfel.
lows and Morgan's to go scot free.
How could l support such a measure?
believe in an income taxa tax that
will hit the little fellow and the big
fellow in the same place. Further
more. I intend agitating an income
tax until l see it written on the
statute books"
AS the logic in the quoted express.
sion indicates, 1t is a new type of a
statesman that was talking, United
States Senator Charles ]. Hughes, Jr.
Of Colorado.
Senator Hughes put his whole soul
into his fight against the corporation
tax. He fought just as hard for an
income tax. Although the senate
killed the income tax for which the
Colorado senator had iaDored, he
didn't seem either disappointed or
discouraged. On the other hand, he
spoke with the determination and en-
thusiasm of man who was Just be-
ginning. instead of ending, a fight.
Hughes is name to file away for
future reference. When he speaks
he has the attention Of the senate.
He voted for free iron ore and free
lumber. But undoubtedly he takes
most pride in his fight against the
cheating corporation tax.
THE income-taxers are defeated
are they not?" l asked the new
statesman from the West.
why, yes, temporarily, but in the
end. no." he answered. "The men
who fought so hard for an income
tax did so because they knew it was
right. Do you imagine they will lie
down and allow things to take their
course simply because Of the prelimi-
nary skirmish? Nothing like that will
happen. When the tariff bill comes
before the senate in it's finished form
to make themselves heard. If defeat
ed then, which is probable. they will
simply wait until they have a little
more strength, in the senate. Then
the income tax will go into effect.
THE corporation tax is a mere SUBJ
terfuge for an income tax. 1t was
not passed in good faith Senator AID
rich admitted on the floor of the
senate he was voting for the corpora
tion tax to defeat the income tax,
and that he expected to see the
measure repealed in couple of
years.
'In your opinion will three-fourths
of the states ask that the constitu-
tion be amended so as to leave no
doubt as to the constitutionality of
an income taxi" l asked Senator
Hughes.
No." he replied, Il do not be-
lieve sufficient number of state
legislators can be enrolled to change
the constitution. 1t should be under
hostility to the income tax is that
the protected interests fear that il
money is raised for government ex.
penses via an income tax, tariff rates
will be cut.
THAT is. the tariff barons feel Ger.
tain that II a large amount of new
revenue is raised from the taxing OF
incomes. the old argument Of the
tax necessities in order to raise suf.
ficient revenue to run the govern.
ment will have lost its efficiency.
Through the prudent wisdom Of
the founders Of this republic 12
| states can set their veto power
against the adoption of an amend
ment and all the other "a may rage
for 1t as they may. but 1t will never
can count blindfolded more than that
many states under the influence and
control Of those devotedly attached to
the highest character Of protective
tariff. and who will never permit the
entering wedge Of an income tax to
be inserted into the revenue system
OF the United States as long as they
have power to prevent II.
II remember when Senator Aldrich.
whose little finger Is Of such great
weight In senate deliberations, de.
nounced those who favored an income
tax as anarchists. socialists. and
some kind Of democrats or other.
During the special session his atten.
tion was called to those utterances.
and he said the statement attributed
to him was historically correct. Just
what that meant have never been
able to discover; but one thing |