The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1910-03-19

Does she Proposea Csassitusienal Ams8a.
Is,eat Allsa Dsssramlnnsaanf

N'ate~ me one Nhi"h seems 20 me me moss
I"een' OF AT has renatne'i nnnouceo' "I
AZ less' has not attracted the auenU"o -
uessrNes
inc proposed amendment V 80 draWn
tnat adopted y viii permit 'ongree-
v" taA re>'de"ts ~ ono S'afe ~ "iane'
rate man residents OF another SaAoe. rOI
instance. " would permit CONGRESS 70 YAK
N-@'oenIs" 81 '"sorao" "r wyoming a. ~
oen' "t 'he'T annual income Nnhe exact
ma from res'deni~ ~ New N"rk or MAY
iand TAX "I or per cent Some tsNored
oca"les mhsh' even be sHogesher et-
emptea. Ihst the amendment NOV eno-
m'''~h '" me S'Ste~ Noun nave ths e"ect
'an eAshS ne nenaons'rated
When INC 'ons'hnt'o" ~ the CnWed
s'stes was adopted the several STATES
we've very les'"n~. ana property 80 OF con
ie'r'hE On me Eemetai Government Aht
po~et 'Apao'e "I peing used'o discriIninsIe
W lANor ct one state over Another' 10
p.escnt snS snch al~er,ninAtao" IN mA.'ers
% tsuph INC CONSTITUTION uiNlosn III
tAAes INTO NO classes 'il direct ,aAes'
shu " nutes ana excuses. OF tnorec' ~ 10
= 'nen p'oN'uen 'hs' Ah orec, tANe" s"ou'"
No Apportsohed among me S'a'es IN pro,
poI,lon 70 theI population Aho 'hat All
uuues anu eAcSes shouiu DC un"OT"
'ne hl'eu S'a,se
~ th'S way DISCRIMINATION oeeN~s" ms
S'.U"s Nss inAoe impossin'e' LOT svey
- euhe' uhect AN OF Ah .nonoSe
sA u ulrec' " mHs' ne Apport'onen ahsons
,ne STATES w proportion 70 popu,Auon,
nureS, " mnA' oe seoerApn'@nb unnorIh
'niOus"o' me th"eo STATES ~ ~
'Ne"' %" preierehce IN iANo' OF one S'
over aho'ner - pos-'oF'
NOW IN lsSS IN the income AH CASES tns
S"pre'n" 'ourt heid tnA' YAK on income
IroIn bropsr,y drec' ,AN Anu no. nh
eA'se' ahu ,nAt oe'hg uhec, ueA " OAn-
ho' "e ieN'en ny congress NNhout appor-
'"'"e" .ho"N us Seter w
'h"H popuIA'oh' ror tnis Tea~on tns W
come tax OF lssS was heid unc0nesituttonai'
tor was NOT appearances among tne StAues
" W"ln't"n 'o popubAton. ~ hs couIt
hAn he'd M income YAK 70 Dc an ekc'-e OF
Wnlrec' "a y inc u Wold nave oeeh sun
'~'l IN ne requirement OF 9sogrnph,cal
nnhormiiy' ana discrimination IN favor 90
''V'hh Hhte- Noun sthh nave oeeh hl-
p"e-'h'e
me pending CONSTITUTIONAL amendments
eNempts income taNes rom the Requirements
81 apportIonnent among the states. ont W
does not provide that they shall Do deemed
excise taNes ana a. snch orouent Ntthfn me
requirement ot geographical uniformity.
" merely proN,deS that the Congress snail
hu'e power 70 lay ana collect taKes on IN
comes. from whatever source derived. with
States. and without regard 70 any census
~ enumeration In other words. 10 does
No. change the classification OF income
'aNe- a. direct taNee rather than excuses.
hut u merely provides In efect that al
though they are direCs taNea they shall he
exempt FROM the requirement of appor-
tionr,ent hetwe~n the States according TO
popula ton requirement which In applt-
able ~ all other direct taNes. II would
remove tn'otns IA Nes from Tho require
of airport Comment without suhieCtinR them
to the requirement. of geographical uni
foruitN
consequently " the proposed amendment
- rattned income taxes need not he either
apporttonsd bet We~n the States or uni
form. hrou yhout the United states Are
tho. people ~ NeW York or Maryland IRE
pared To- oonf.r On Congress a power 80 tar
them At A higher rate than the residents
,f Massachusetts Nebraska California or
-,,ra o,bey favored state II not they
must .s.. that the p.nding Amendment Is
defeated
n all he aid thai ANYTHING - unfair aaa