The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1909-06-03
WASHINGTON


FROM our Regular Correspondent.
Washington, d. c., May 81, 600.
If the Senate were to vote TODAY
on the question of an income tax
it would be added to the tariff bill.
This fact was made known last
night to the President by Senators
Aldrich and Crane who are greatly
disturbed over the situation, al
though they still hope to induce
enongh of the progressive Republi-
cans to abandon the idea. 1t will
require three more votes than
the leaders can command to send
the income tax amendment to the
Judiciary committee which is the
plan proposed by the Republican
organization for burying the prop
osition for this session and proba-
bly, for such as they control the
Senate. The chief objection to an
income tax is that it will under
mine the protective policy. The
amendments proposed by Senators
Bailey and Cummins respectively
would raise a revenue approximate
ing 500 900 year. So much
revenue raised by direct taxation
would necessitate the lowering OF
many of the duties and the extreme
protectionists are appalled, at such
prospect. On the other hand, they
would not dare collect so much
from incomes and then gather into
the Treasury the full amount of
revenue which the present bill
would produce because that would
seriously menace the prosperity of
the country and encourage all area
OF extravaganza even exceeding
that of the last few years.
*s.#
SO greatly are the Republican
leaders alarmed at the situation in
the Senate that they are seriously
considering offering the Taft propo
sltion of a tax on the dividends of
corporations as substitute for the
income tax amendment. The for
mer would raise a revenue, it is es-
tlmated, of about $40, ,ooo, 900 and
thus obviate to a considerable ex-
tent the necessity of lowering the
duties all along the line. The Re.
publicans believe that in this wav
they may be able to head off the
income tax advocates. Possibly
they can. 1t remains to be seen.
#.r*
The oft repeated question "What |
is a Democat"? seems likely to be |
presented in new form and any
man who listens to the tariff debate |
in the Senate for a few hours may
we'll ask himself Gam l Demo.
craft? Senator McEnnery of Louisi
ana has just been telling the Senate
that the old Democratic doctrine of |
free raw materials, or tariff for rev.
enue only, ett., is all nonsense and |
has been begging his party col
leagues to vote with him tor the
highest possible duty on Sugar. |
Senator Baily says that the pledge |
IN the Democratic platform to |
repeal the duty on lumber is un-
warranted and un-Democratic, and |
Senator Stone of Missouri says Mr..
Bryan has no right to criticise those |
Democrats who voted for a duty |
on iron ore as the free raw mate |
nal doctrine has been exploded. |
Senator Clay of Georgia, on the
olher hand, says that the duty on
sugar is an outrage, that it makes
only for increased profits to the
Sugar Trust and that it imposes
great additional burden or the con-
sumer. One need not be in the
condition of the member of the
House who first propounded the
historic question, Were am l att?
to become confused regarding his
party allegiance after listening to
these Democratic statesmen for a
few hours, and then when he hears
Senator Bristow protesting vigo-
rcusly against the high duties
which tine Republicans are seeking