The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-04-29
TARIFF IN SENATE


washington, April 28-When the
discussion OF the tariff was resumed
in the Senate today, Mr.. Brown (Neb.)
spoke on his amendment recently In
troduced providing for . constitutional
amendment authorizing an income tax.
/ He argued that the people of the sew
eral states should have the opportunity
Of voting on the question In order that
the validity Of such law never wouli
be questioned.
1--WE owe this to the people," he said.
"because there has long been an earn
est and determined demand for an
equitable income tax"
Mr.. Brown was interrupted by Mr..
Rayner, (Md.) who insisted that Con-
gress already had the power to lay and
collect taxes on incomes ami that even
were the amendment TO these adopted.
1t still would be necessary to have an
apportionment.
The suggestion was not accepted
with any too good grace by the Nebras-
ka Senator. who said that he was not
50 beside himself as TO believe his
resolution would meet the critical
Judgment OF the Senator from Mary
land
Mr.. Paynter, (Ky.) interjected that
the Supreme court OF the United States.
as now constituted. might change its
former opinion. holding an income tax
law unconstitutional
Mr.. Brown replied that he was ready
to support any bill providing for such
a tax
Upon Mr.. Browns request the resoiu-
tion was referred to the committee on
judiciary. "
Lumber Schedules.
Discussing the lumber schedule, Mr..
simrnons. On. CO. said that lumber and
its products represented the principal
industry of twelve states, affecting
more than thousand cities which were
largely dependent upon II. He opposed
the proposed reduction on lumber prin-
cipally, he said, because labor consti-
tuted a large element In the cost of pro-
ducing lumber and in the cost Of pro-
ducing any other manufactured pro-
duct and further that lumber was a
competitor with some OF the articles
which added to the cost Of its preiuc-
ton.
Il submit" he said, shat there can
be no more cruel repression of an in
dustry than by law adding thirty per
cent to the cost of It's production and
then forcing II into competition on the
one hand with the foreign product.
which on account OF the difference in |
OF transportation can be provided at 80
per cent, apd less. and on the other
hand for forcing competition with |
product OF our country, the price of |
which has been enhanced thirty per
cent by the protective tariff.
How do you square your advocacy
of tariff on lumber with the declare
ton of the national democratic plat
form of 1s0sT' Mr.. Dixon Of Montana
inquired.
Mr. Simmons asserted that there was
no difficulty about that, That plat
form. he maintained. declared for a
tariff for revenue ami he did not be-
lteve the Dingley rate on lumber was
more than a revenue rate.
Mr. Simmons denied that lumber
prices had been fabulously high and
that any great fortunes had been made
in manufactured lumber In the United
States.
The present crusade against a duty
on lumber Mr., simmons charged had
been instigated by spectators having
interests In Canada. He maintained
that there was no lumber trust.
Note OF warning.
To those of the Senate who were
favorable to higher rates OF duty on the
products of the farmer. yet who were
advocating free lumber, Mr.. Simmons
declared. as q note of warning, that
they were standing In their own light.
He asserted that the best purchaser in
the south of meats. CORN. hay ana wheat
from the west was the small laborer.
These 100000 men," ne said. feed
millions Of mouths and clothe three
millions OF backs, and IL you cheaper
Iumber-duty advocates succeed In
driving the southern manufacturefs out
of their markets you will do Il by
the purchasing power Of
your best customers"
Mr.. Gallinger declared that Nyav,
England was almost in an Identical
and that the argument pre-
sented by the North Carolina Senator