The Washington herald., 1909-06-08

with splendid burst Of Intellectual
speed. and the redoubtable debaiers OF
Columbian Society, Georga Washington
University. scored effectively against
their rivals of the Needham. in the an
nual pl.ze definite OF the law department
Whsd Champ Clark. leader OF the mi
nority in the House OF Representative,
stepped forward on the rostrum as one
OF the judges. be referred humorously
10 the debaters on the floor Of the House.
The next time the income tax bob5ed Up.
he said he wanted the six young de5aters
OF George Washington 10 thrash out the
question thoroughly and educate the
members Of the House on the subject.
ollie james Smiled.
Ouie ~. James. another Of the Judges.
smiled as his leader issued the invitation,
and Justice Wendell Philips Stafford
the third Of the jury also nodded his
approval
The winning debating team was com
pose5 OF Abe Cohen. Of Wisconsin: z. P.
Gates. or Arkansas. a1c~John Jensen. OF
Utah. The Needham Society was repre-
sented by r. H. Blakesley, California;
/ Oscar Thompson. Wisconsin; Frank E.
( Edgerton, Nebraska The decision OF the
{ judges was unanimous
F. P. Gates won the gold medal as
4 being the best Of the debaters considered
/ from the point OF view OF delivery and
compact argument. and Oscar Thompson
/ took second prize, four volumes OF legal
( classics.
( The Columbian debaters. favoring the
( Federal income tax. held one strong ad-
vantage at the outset. for the constitu-
tionality OF such a law II passed by Con-
( gress was conceded. This reduced me
/ debate 70 a pure academic study OF the
J legal and Intellectual and economic as
/ poets OF the income tax. and no reference
( to possible Supreme Court decisions based
on a previous one beclouded the issue.
Would EquaIiEe Burden.
/ The affirmative held. from the opening
/ Of its Intellectual artillery by Abe Cohen.
/ that the income tax would prove a means
Of equalIzing the distribution OF the bur
! dens OF compelling the rich man 10 pay
( his proportonate share OF the govern
meut burden. Il would be the proper
I method OF determining the share which
/ each member Of the community should
hear because his income IS the test or
/ his earning capacity.
When E. P Gates made his Affirmative
I speech In rebuttal, he executed a Hank
movement on his opponents and turned
upon them with telling effect.
You declare the income tax is social
/ istlc" he cried. what IS your deini-
! ton OF q socialist I have found that the
{ Furf her =
OF limited income declares IN favor Of
an income tax. The limited income side
/ Of 4 seems 20 bear q great part OF the
/ discussion. Now am man OF limited
1 income. and in favor OF an income tax.
and yet do not think am socialist
I The truth is. the time Is past when the
/ income tax can be seriously denounced as
part and parcel OF the socialistic plan.
and any man who advances such an
argument before the people is putting
out old scare material. which doesn'
scare any longer"
The final argument on the negative side
Awas presented by r H Blaksley. and he
.fswiftly summed up the more effective
arguments against income tax legisla-
tion.
I'VE do not need 10 make q nation OF
per5urers.r he said. The income tax
would be the greatest temptation 70 fraud
and deception this country ever snew-
The rich man can easily negotiate the
bonds OF securities which constitute a
major portion Of his income; the poor
man cannot. On him will fan the brunt
OF the burden
Income Tax n Snare.
The proposed plan would not solve
the taxing problem. The rightful solu-
ton is found IN just and equitable as
isessnent under the present system-there
can be small objection 10 II when proper
II administered Tits income tax is a
snare and a delusion.
Secretary OF War Dickinson presided.
and. with the judges, complinented the
debaters on the high quality Of their
argument The audience was large and
the victory of the Columbian Society
proved popular.