The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-07-16

MI MllIer--MF. Speaker, I simply say
! the gentleman from Missouri is mis-
| taken.
And on the contrary aver that there
are more laboring men in America to-
DAY Who own their homes than at any
other period in the history of the re-
public, and that there are more homes
owned by the laboring people of Amer
jca today than are owned by all the Ia
borers OF the rest of the world.
III Rucker-Oh, but that is the fact
Mr.. Miller-There has been a great
| deal of criticism, and some on this
| side as well as on the Democratic
side, of the position of the Republi-
can party upon the subject of tax
upon corporations I do not agree
with the gentleman from Massachu-
sets, who talks about this kind OF
legislation being "the political Jack
Cade of the future for the levying OF
political blackmail.' That may be all
right for the people of New England,
who have enjoyed the benefits or the
levying of political blackman more
than any other section of the country,
if there has ever been any such levy
ing as the distinguished gentlemen
talks about. There is not a state or
municipality in this country that
does not have a statute or ordinance
of some kind in reference to taxation
of wealth. Just take a man who goes
into community or city and wants
to sell his wares or merchandise upon
the streets of that city. What is
first go to the city clerk and get per-
mission to sell his wares there.
What is that? Is that direct tax?
That is tax upon his business And
so say, when you come to the ques-
ton of corporate wealth, we do not
propose a direct tax, but a tax on
the business of the corporation, and
which the supreme court has already
declared constitutional. While per-
sonally I favor an income tax, yet
am aware of the fact that the su-
preme court has declared such a tax
unconstitutional, and for this reason
shall support corporation tax,
which is constitutional, and will vote
for the submission to the people of
the country for their decision an
amendment to the constitution to
provide for the taxing of incomes.
Now, want to appeal to my DEM
ocratic friends, if they are honestly
in favor Of an, income tax. and be-
lieVe they are, to join US in this one
member that during the civil war
every Democrat in both branches of
congress, but one, voted that the in |
come tax was unconstitutional; but |
if you believe in the declaration of |
the Democratic platform at Denver |
last year, and If you believe with the |
utterances of your party leaders upon |
this floor that an income tax is con-
stitutiona1. then fall in line with the |
Republicans who are going to enact |
legislation along this line and help /
us out upon this proposition. I agree
with the gentleman from Missouri on
the question of the amount of cor
porate wealth that ought not to be |
as $4,000, at least above $500.
Mr.. Burleson-I would like to
know how many Democrats were
here during the civil war.
Mr. Miller.-Mr. Speaker, there /
were As members here at that time,
and the rest were not here because
they had voluntarily gone out to de-
stroy the Union. and that is why they
want to suggest to my friend from
Texas that. this is no time for
gentleman fronlA Texas to raise this
issue. We are There discussing a
question: of taxation that is to be
applied to- our people now and not the
issues growing out of the civil war.
Upon that subjectsI will. be very glad
to talk at some other time, but not
now.
Now. Mr.. Speaker, I want to call
the attention of the gentleman from
(Mr. McCal1)I do
not see him here, however-to the
position upon this question of taxing
Incomes He says we can not do it
under our constitution, and thinks
that the constitution ought not be
or changed SO that it can
be done, and says that it is tax upon
industry and upon wealth. If there
IS any tax in this country that is not
a tax upon industry or wealth.
would like to know what 1t IS. why
should the gentleman from New {
stand here, representing
that section of the country that has
been made great and prosperous on
account of the system OF taxation OF
this republic, and say that we nave
no right to tax the wealth of this :
country? New England became great
and powerful under the system OF !
protection that has made this country {
what 1t is today. They were more !
located than the states IN {
he central or extreme west.
The population from other countries
,ame there first, and they found the
manufacturing in this country done IN /
New England, as it was done in that f
,arIv day SO the wealth that came I
rom abroad went to New England, as
veil as the laborers, and they had a 6
11rpll1s of both. Now, because tax
# this kind would rest more heavily
lpon New England than possibly any +
,ther section of the country, the first
-oice to be heard against 1t comes 7
rom that same New England, the sec J
ion of the country that has been more
avored by legislation than any other- :
want to suggest that that section '
f our country that has been so mar +
elously prosperous as a result of leg t
Station should be the last to come b
Lere and advocate anything else than t
n income tax And Whether New =
Ing AAI4O wants I Il
think she will find that when the
ubject is submitted to the American D
eople, as it will be, three-fourths of v
he states of this country outside or
lew England will vote to change the s.
so as to provide in case t
f war for the levying of tax upon &
he wealth of the country to assist in Ii
aving the life of the nation itself The | e
reat west and the south will control o
1 that matter. in my Judgment, and
amt to suggest to you gentlemen of d
-cnc.cn srnrrl IN