New-York tribune., 1909-05-05

sorts Of manufactures. whether cloths or clothing
or anything else containing a trace of wool, must
be weighed up under the benign benefits and higher
rates of the wool schedule"
In discussing the cotton schedule. Mr.. Dolliver
sought 70 interrogate Mr.. Aldrich to what had
been said in the hearings before the Ways and
Means Committee but the Rhode Island Senator
said he had not read the Ways and Means Com
mittee hearings The Iowa Senator said he was in
favor OF the Dingley rates cotton manufactures
and then proceeded to attack the amendments pro
posed TO this schedule hv the Senate committee
He charged that majority of the rates In TINS
schedule had been raised by new Cassiticauons ana
changes phraseology and intimated that it would
be well TO inquire how the appraisers had come To
recommend some Of the changes
Throughout the speech of the Iowa Senator, Mr-
Aldrich asked questions. with view 70 showing
that Mr. Doliver repeating arguments which
had been made many times by Democratic orators.
Once he interrupted. with the assertion that the
men who are trying destroy this tariff are sun
doing business at the old stand" MI DoHVer
resented this imputation upon his RePubicahlsm
and insisted he had abated his interest IN the
protective policy.
Just before the Senate adjourned Mr.. Aldrich re-
ceived leave to print in the Record the speeches
made in 1897 by Senator Jones' Of Arkansas ana
Senator Vest Of Missouri, the cotton and wool
schedules He explained that these speeches con-
tanned practically every criticism made by Mr. Dol
liver. The- made by leading Democrats he
explained. and were intended to break down the
protective system. Mr. AiullCH went 'l ~ 0o''
that every change made in the cotton schedule was
in the interest Of the American producer. Certain
changes had been made substituting speclhc Tor al
valorem rates. but there had been no increases
He declared that when this schedule was reacheu
he would be able demonstrate this and make
it so clear that even the Senator from Iowa would
be able tc understand it. Mr.. Adrich insisted that
Mr. Dolliver had gained his information from inn
porters who were anxious that the duties should
be modified not I'm the interest of the consumer OF
, -aa hut their selfish ends
In closing his speech upon the income tax MI
Rorah contended that the matter Of the conSttu-
tionality OF the could we'll be Tesuhmtted TO te
Supreme Court Of the United States. This. he SAID
Was because os facts OF history revealed in respect
to the purposes of the trainers of the Constitu-
tion which were not presented to the court Whth
the income Of few years ago was ar
gued, and also because OF decisions rendered pN
The court since the income tax disposed Of
Mr.. Root followed Mr.. Borah- He submitted sta
tstics to show the extent to which the wealth OF
the country is taxed by states, counties and
municipalities
republic property does bear very great pro-
portion Of the burden of taxation
He gave figures to show that the ad valorem
taxes levied on that property were at the rate OF
about three-quarters Of per cent. which ne sad'
would be equivalent to an income tax OF 10 per
cent throughout the country He said that IN New
York State real estate did not yield a net income
Who at last paws this real estate tax, the real
estate owner the renter" asked AR Borah.
Mr.. Root replied that it was Imposed upon, ; me
property and paid by it, in spite OF any an5lE 9
that might be made. While he said, he was nor
arguing against the imposition OF an income IL III
Mr. Root begged Senators to reInenhet IN C, iiei,
arguments that the property Of the United Sta'F
bears a for the support Of government IN
the United States equal 10 nearly eight times lIe
income tax that they proposing 10 assess upon
it He added. It erroneous view anu
think. misChievous view, to present to the peope
of the country, who have not the ready access 10
statistical data that have, the impression that
the property owners OF the United States DO hoi
bear a substantial part Of the burdens OF gov
ernment."