The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1910-03-01
Dlsagrees With Views Of Gov.
ernor Hughes
He STATES HIS POSITION
In a Letter to the New York Legis
lature-He Tells Why lie Favors
an Income Tax, and the Pro-
posed Law.

Albany n. ~ MRfeh i--b ifhu hoQt
reason for advocating The proposed IN
come tax amendment and his views o.
tho subject as opposed to those Of Gov
ernor Hughes, who has publicly opposei
the amendment were presented TO thr
New York legislature last night IN III
form Of a letter addressed to State Sen
ator Davenport Senator Davenport pre-
scented the letter to the Senate and 4
was also read ia the assembly The let
ter Is a. follower.
9Ny Dear Senators Since our con
yersaton last March, have given muel
sidaration to The scope and effect q th'
proposed income tax amendment to n,
constitution Of the United states.
'9iuch Is respect re opinion Or tn
governor .of the state / cannot agres
with the view expressed in bis special
message Of January 5 and as ! advocated
10 the senate The resolution to submit
the proposed amendment X seems ap-
propriate that should state my view q
It's effect
eThe objection made to ire amendment
IS That ibis viii confer upon tie national
government the power of tax incomes
derived from bonds issued BY the states
or under the authority Of the states and
viii place the borrowing capacity q tbe
state and its governmental agencies e
the mercy Of the federal taxing power
q 40 not find IN he amendment any
such meaning O effect % not con.
slider that tie amendment "a any degree
whatever win enlarge The taxing power
IF tha national government q win have
any effect except % relieve the exercise
Of that taxing power from The require
ment that The tax shall be apportioned
among the severed states The effect 81
The amendment sill De. 10 my view the
same a. # It seld The United States
may las 3 tax o. ineores without ap-
Forthcoming tha lsv, ana t1is shail Be ap.
piieabie whatever the source 81 the Is.
coma subjected g tie tax leaving the
question What incomes are subject g.
national taxationg' to Be determined 81
The same principles and rules which are
now applicable to the determination Of
that question.
"Tbe amendment win 81 no new grant
81 power The Congress already has
power "a impose faxes "a Incomes. from
whatever source derived. subject rs tie
rule 81 construction which excluded state
securities from TIE operation q the pow.
er but the taxes 90 imposed must be ap
portioned among the states uBdcr tie
proposed amendment there win be the
same and no greater power to tax TT
comes from whatever sources derived
subject to TIE Same rule 81 construction
but relieved from the requirement that
the TAX shall be appoetioned
10 appears therefore. chat no dan
GER 20 the power Or insrmuentalitics Of
the state IS To Re unprecedented from The
adoption 81 the amendments
aIt would be cause for regret Il tie
amendments were rejected by Die iegi
.ature % New York
sThc circumstances that originally ius
tilted TIE establishment of the rule 81
apportionment "a the constitution have
long since passed away u Is universally
conceded that Il application to existing
conditions would BE- 81 unjust and 70
equitable a e % impossible. The power
d taxation which Che rule makes L In
possible for che nation to exercise mag
again, ~ It has once been, be vital to TIE
Of national existence It
would be msst unfortunate II tie seg
sral states Of the Union were to insist
upon the continuance d this unjust aud
useless limitation upon The necessary
powers originally and wisely granted to
.he national government
Senator Davenport said Chat Mf Root
lad taken this rather informal method
y communicating his ideas because he
'elt Il to be the business af tie governor
.ather than IF 9 senator % send
'ormal message to The legislature.