The San Juan islander. [volume] (Friday Harbor, Wash.) 1898-1914, 1909-07-23
INCOME TAX
DOOMED
At LEAST SENATORS BE-
LIEVE RATIFICATION
IMPOSSIBLE.
With New England Solidly OPP
posed and Many in Doubtful
Column-Legislatures of Three
Fourths of the States May Fail
To Endorse Measure.

Washington, D. c., July 17.-Sena-
tors who led the fight to secure an IN
come tax amendment to the pending
tariff bill do not believe that three
fourths of the states of the Union,
through their legislatures, will ratify
the proposed income tax amendment
to the constitution. The refusal of IL
states to ratify such an amendment
will defeat it, and they believe that
IL states can readily be held in check
by powerful moneyed interests that
WELD tremendous influence, especially
in the East.
To begin with, New England is sol
idly against the income tax. In addi-
ton, it is conceded that Pennsylvania
New Jersey and Delaware are of like
inclination. 1t is, of course, true that
the bulk of an income tax, if levied
by the federal government, would be
collected in the states named, because
of the excessive wealth and the fabu-
lous incomes Of the leading citizens
of those nine states. But it is not
alone because of this fact that New
England and the other states named
are counted as sure to refuse to ratify
a constitutional amendment.
When the senate was struggling to
stave off a vote on the income tax
amendment the senators from Maine,
New Hampshire, Vermont, Mas sachus-
etts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Penn
sylvania, Delaware and New Jersey
were always recorded against it. The
senators from those states dominate
the legislatures. Having this control,
and being unequivocally opposed to an
income tax, it is very natural to pre-
sumo that these senatorial bosses will
be able, by the sheer exercise of pow
er, to prevent favorable action upon
the constitutional amendment which
is to be submitted to the various
states for ratification.
Need Only Three Others.
With these nine states safely lined
up against the income tax amend
ment, Senator AldrIch and his lieu
tenants need gain the support or CO.
operation of three other states and
there is little question that this can
be done. Illinois, Maryland, West Vir-
ginia, Ohio, New York, California and
Utah are all regarded as fruitful fields
in which to operate, and if need be,
it is believed some of the southern
states might be prevailed upon to at
least refuse to act upon the constitu-
tional amendment
California and Utah are placed in
the doubtful column because of the
attitude of their respective senators.
The Southern Pacific influence in Cali
fornia-the influence that put Perkins
and Flint in the senate-would be
antagonistic to the income tax amend
ment, in all probability. If so, the
unprecedented would have to happen
in California in order that that state
might ratify the proposed amendment.
In Utah the Mormon influence is all
powerful. 1t elected Smoot and Suth-
erland to the senate. Smoot, to gain
place on the finance committee, had
to sell out to Senator Aldrich; he had
to become tool in the hands of the
Smoot see to it that Utah does not
ratify the amendment, and Smoot in
turn will lay the matter before the
Mormon leaders. Those Mormons are
grateful lot; they appreciate what
has been done for Smoot, one of their
apostles, and it is altogether probable
that they will see to it that Aldrichs
orders are carried out
AS it only requires three states in
addition to the nine known to be an
tagonistic to the income tax amend
ment, to accomplish it's defeat, the sit
uation in the doubtful states named
is such as to apparently justify the
believers in the income tax in their
assumption that the proposed consti-
tutiOnal amendment is doomed.
A preliminary canvass of the stu
alton leads to the conclusion that ~
states are reas onably certain to ap-
prove the amendment-eigh less than
the number needed to ratify.