Cameron County press. [volume] (Emporium, Cameron County, Pa.) 1866-1922, 1909-11-04
FOR AN EMERGENCY
PRESIDENT TAFT EXPLAINS POSI-
TlON ON INCOME TAX.
Declares EmphaticaIiy He is Not in
Favor of Its imposition at Once,
Though He Would Have
States lndorse It.

In the light of extensive and widely
varying speculation regarding the at
titude of President Taft toward the in
come tax. it is gratifying to note that
in his speech at Portland. Ore, he set
forth his views with directness
which leaves no doubt as to where he
stands. Following his discussion OF
the corporation tax. the president
said
II am not in favor Of levying an in
come tax such as that which was pro-
vided in the bill. in times of peace. 1
am not in favor of it because | think
it will prove to be too inquisitorial as
to individuals, and | think it will be
found also that it puts a premium on
perjury, so that the gentlemen whom
you are especially after when you levy
an income tax will escape, and only
those which are too conscientious will
pay more than their share. In times
of dire need it is necessary that it
(the government should use such a
tax. Objectionable as it is in certain
of its features, and, therefore. | hope
it will pass the states"
The presidents declaration must set
at rest the allegations that he favors
the imposition of an income tax at
once. if the constitutionality Of such a
measure shall have been confirmed by
the adoption by three-fourths of the
states of the amendment submitted by
the present congress.
Tho nroei6nnt'c afiDo1 pncitinn
does, however, raise a decidedly in
teIesting question. If. as he hopes,
the federal government is authorized
to impose an income tax. how long
will it be before it is compelled to do
SO? Mr.. Taft believes the federal gov
ernment should enjoy the right to i'm
pose such tax in emergencies. On
the other hand, he would regard the
exercise of that right under normal
conditions as bad because, as he ex-
plains, 1t would put a premium on
perjury and would probably prove i'm
possible OF equitable assessment. And
yet the strength of the advocacy of an
income tax as a normal method of
raising revnue was clearly demon
strated In the session of congress re-
Gently adjourned So great was that
strength that at one time a majority
of the senate was committed to it and,
while there were no figures available,
the leaders clearly appreciated that If
the house had an opportunity to vote
on the question it would adopt the tax
by large majority. The actual adop-
tion of the tax was prevented only by
the influence which the president him
self eXerted to secure the enactment
of the corporation tax as a substitute
part of which influence consisted of
the argument that to re-enact an in
come tax without the authority of a
constitutional amendment would con.
stitute an affront offered by the legis
lative to the judicial branch of the
government. The adoption of the con
stitutional amendment would, OF
course, destroy the force of that argu
ment and thus detract materially from
the presidents influence to prevent
the imposition of an income tax
while the action of three-fourths of all
the states in comforting on the federal
government the power to impose such
tax would inevitably strengthen the
position of those who favor it.