Watertown leader. [volume] (Watertown, Jefferson County, Wis.) 1909-1911, 1910-02-11
GOV. HUGHES IS
B0RAHS TARGET
IDAHO SENATOR ATTACKS OPPON-
ENTS OF PROPOSED AMEND
MENT TO CONSTITUTION.
U?H0LDS INCOME TAX MEASURE
Declares That People Will Not Stand
for Taxation Which Protects
Idle Wealth
UNITED STATES HAS POWER.

WASHINGTON, d. c., Feb. 10. =
Senator William K. Borah of Idaho took
occasion In the Senate today to attack
the position of those who oppose accept
ance by the several states of the proposed
amendment to the constitution of the
United States which would permit the
levylng of Il tax on incomes without APP
portionment between the states.
incidentally the Senator paid his re-
spects to Gov. Hughes of New York in
Guiding him by Inference among those
who profess to be i'll favor of an income
tax, but oppose practical measures which
would permit its enforcement. His al
fusion was, of course, to Gov. Hughes
annual message to the New York state
Legislature urging defeat of the proposed
amendment on the ground that its lam
guage might be so construed as to au-
thorpe Congress to tax incomes derived
from state and municipal bonds.
Public Is Suspicious.
Senator Borah pictured the mind of
the public as in Il state of suspicion and
dlscontent toward the government. and
declared that the people could not much
longer be withheld from radical action
IT taxation were continued in protec-
ton of wealth and in exemption of lin
comes which sustain luxury and breed
ldleness and idiOcy."
Senator's Conclusions.
Senator Borah outlined his conclusions
as follows:
That the proposed amendment adds
nothing to the taxing power of the ma
uona! government, This power was
complete, unfettered, plenary before 1t
can be no more than that should the pro-
posed amendment be adOOted
Ihe proposed amendment does not deal
or propose to deal with the question of
power which is already complete but
simply with the manner and method of
Its exercise and of that power.
NO one has ever questioned the power
of the national government to lay an in
come tax for said by Justice
White the question has always been
whether an admittedly unlimited power
to tax has been used according to the
instruction as to method" and ii was to
remedy the method alone that the amend
ment was submitted.
Words Add Nothing.
The words from whatever source"
add nothing to the force of the amend
ment. 1t would. in constitutional par
lance, be just the same if it said Ito
lay and collect taxes on incomes without
apportionment" for who could then say
that you would not have the right to
lay taxes upon all incomes. The pres
ent taxing power would not be a particle
stronger if it said to lay and collect
taxes upon all property from whatever
source.
To construe the proposed amendment
so as to enable US to tax the instru-
mentalities of the state would do vio-
lence to the rules laid down by the SUI
preme court for a hundred years, wrench
the whole institution from its harmoni-
nrOnOrtlOnS and HpcTrnu tbn object
and purpose for which the whole instru-
ment was framed.
To construe it to cover those incomes
from sources within the jurisdiction and
control of the sovereignty laying the tax
is to construe it in harmony with the
principles given by Marshall and fol
lowed from that hour to this.