Omaha daily bee., 1909-04-29
Necessity Exists for Provision that
Will Always Be Plain.
POLLOCK CASE PIVOTAL POINT
Senators Poynter and Rayner Engage
in Running Debate.
BURKETT AND MINORITY DICTUM
He shows I'm Remarks on Lumber
TRriH where Democratic Plat
form Was written and
by whom.
CFrom a staff Correspondent }

WASHINGTON. April 8.-(Special Tele-
gram. )-Senator Norris Brown today in
support of his proposed amendment to the
constitution, authorized congress to levy
tax on incomes and inheritances, brought
the senate very close to a realization that
new conditions are abroad in the land. The
Junior senator from Nebraska was given
close attention throughout his remarks and
was interrupted but twice, pnce by Sena-
tor Rayner of Maryland, and again by
Senator Paynter OF Kentucky. with volley
of questions, all of them being quickly and
easily answered without the slightest ap-
parent embarrassment by the Nebraskan.
Senator Brown was In good voice. His
proposition to amend the constitution,
while probably not meeting with the ap-
proval of a majority of the senate, never
theless received marked attention from
that body and there is no doubt his argu-
ment for It was argument and an able
one, drove home some new ideas on this
subject in the minds of the anti-income
tax senators.
Senator Brown declared the country is
entitled to be given opportunity to
amend the constitution SO there can be no
question To the validity of the income
tax law when next it is passed. The sens-
tor made it plain that he was an ardent
advocate of an income tax and that he
would vote for either the Cummins or
Bailey amendment, but he declared he
would like to see the constitutionality of
such a law settled for all time by an
| amendment
Would Fix Law Beyond Doubt.
ut seems to me that those of us who
favor laying a tax burden on incomes
I have no right to feel satisfied with the
| enactment of such a law unless we take
the further step of passing a resolution
rendering to the people of the several
states of the union an opportunity SO to
amend the constitution that the validity
of the law will never be questioned" said
Senator Brown.
I'VE owe this to the people of the
,. country, who have long believed in an
| income tax. If the argument OF the
| Senator from Texas in this chamber for
the last two days has demonstrated any
| thing, 1t is that there is great doubt in
the minds of all people as to the consti-
! tutionality of the income tax Although
| they believe in the theory of this kind
! of tax, they recognize that the supreme
court has spoken and has declared it un-
constitutional. 1t is clearly our duty to
| give tpeIl "a CndnCe TO make the COnstl-
tuition clear on the question of taxa
tlon that litigation will never arise
| again"
Mr.. Brown showed that the trainers of
the constitution, justices OF the supreme
| court, as well as distinguished lawyers,
in all time had disagreed as to the mean
ing of the words direct taxes" in the
! constitution. He showed that even SEN
ator Bailey, who had citicised the ruling
| of the supreme court, had been willing 10
admit the question was so close that 1t
might easily fall either way on the con-
stitutionality of the tax.
Attacks BaiIey's Position.
suppose we admit that Senator Bailey
clearly demonstrated that the court
should have held the last income tax Law
constitutional where does It leave us?'
asked Senator Brown. He has left us
no better off than when we were divided
about the soundness of that decision. OF
what avail is 1t to conclude here that the
decision of the supreme court in the Pol
lock case was wrong and that the court
should have held another way? 1t avails
us nothing. The trainers OF the consti