The Washington times., 1909-04-15

Senator Bailey of Texas today intro
duced in the Senate his income tax
amendment TO the tariff bill which was
indorsed by the conference of Demo-
cratic Senators held yesterday.
The Democrats propose to voc solidly
for this form of tax. and expect that
there will be enough Republican votes
from the West and Middle west to
put it through.
Measure Constitutional
Senator BaiIey's proposition is to taS
all incomes over and above 5000 at the
rate Of per cent. In the old law Wnicn
was declared unconstitutional by the
Supreme Court. the rate was per cent
on incomes Of $4,000 or more Mr. Ball
ey's amendment specifically exempts in
comes from Federal, state, county, aho
municipal securities, and the incomes
OF corporations below 5000. Senator
Bailey expects that the plan, II II pc
comes a law, will raise SlOOVVV,VV OF
revenues. A person having an income
of $4,000, under his proposition, would
only have to pay a tax OF Sl5O 10 the
Government, that being the rate on his
income above $500.
proposed to challenge the correctness
of the Supreme Court decision which
declared that an income tax was un-
constitutional. lie cOnSlueTSQs noWtNSif
that the court was perfectly right when
il decided unanimously against taxa
ton of State, county. and municipal
securities or the salaries of State Of
ficers. For this reason his amendment
exempts incomes from these sources.
Senator Bailey calculates that under his
amendment railroads would pay S30,OOO,-
900, and other corporations $50, ,0OO,0 600.
In presenting his amendments Sena-
tor Bailey said: II desire TO invite any
Senator who is interested to make any
suggestion or offer any amendment his
judgment may deem proper. The amend
ment is in the main the same as the
tariff law of 1894, with some important
and other immaterial exceptions The
most important exception is that which
raises incomes exempt from tax from
81 900 to 5000. have sought to supply
the reduced revenue which might result
from the higher exemption by increas-
ing the tax rate from TO 3 per cent
have no kind Of doubt that 3 per cent
more revenue than per cent on In
comes over $4,000
Il have responded to the decision of
the Supreme Court that State. county.
and municipal securities are not con-
stitutionally subject to an income tax
and 1 have distinctly exempted them.
Only to this extent has the amendment
been changed 20 meet the decision of
the court. The amendment distinctly
challenges that opinion. The best legal
opinion OF the country is that the court
erred in its decision. 1t overruled the
decisions OF a hundred years and it is
the question to the court again
1.-The amendment contains a reprint
Of the administrative features Of the old
act.
Thinks Court Erred.
81 do not introduce the taxation
feature in order to tax prosperous
people. 1 regard all taxes as neces-
sary evil and a burden not to be
avoided. II IL were not necessary to
have revenue to conduct the Govern
ment I would not favor lev=Elg any
tax. But as it is necessary. = IS bet
/ ter TO lay the tax on the people en-
| joying abundant prosperity rather
than on the backs and appetites OF
those least able to bear the burden
Would Raise SOC,
AN income tax rises and falls with
ability to pay. Those who do pay can
not complain that we unduly burden
them. A man having an income of 5000
a year may be fairly asked to pay $50
/ TO the Government that protects him. "
Senator AldriCh asked Mr.. Bailey how
much revenue he thought would be pro-
duced by his income tax proposition.
/ Mr.. aBiley replied that he could no
more tell that than Mr.. Aldrich himself
could tell how much revenue would be
/ raised by the tariff bill. But, he said.
/ he aid not believe that II would be less
/ than $50. 100000 or 100000. He said he