Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1911-06-06

of $4,000 is taxed 2 per cent. or $500;
one OF $4,000 per year is taxed 4 per
cent, or $500, etc. 1t is this sort Of an
impost that causes the loudest yells
from big business
Income Tax In America.
In America there was an income tax
in some of the colonies. and the nation
put on the screws in the graduated
form during the civil war. The law
was repealed in 1872, and no new one
was enacted until the beginning of the
second Cleveland administration. 1t
was this act that the supreme court
declared unconstitutional by a FIVE to
four vote, Justice Shiras having
changed his mind. Perhaps no single
cnange of mind ever cost q nation so
much money.
The pending amendment was intro
duced by Senator Norris Brown of Ne
braska in the extra session Of congress
of 1909 1t passed both houses during
the life of that session by the required
two-thirds majority and has been rati-
fed by the legislatures of the follow
ing states:
Alabama. Arkansas. California, Colo
RADIO, Georgia. Idaho. Illinois. Indiana.
Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky. Maryland,
Maine. Michigan, Mississippi. Mis-
souri,, Montana. Nebraska. Nevada.
North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio,
Oklahoma. Oregon, South Carolina.
South Dakota, Tennessee. Texas.
Washington and Wisconsin.
How the States Stand.
Most of the states passed the amend.
ment promptly and some of them by
practically unanimous vote in both
houses In others IT was passed by
one house and rejected by the other.
but on an appeal 10 the people the next
legislature was returned with both
houses favorable. In only two states.
Rhode Island and Vermont. was it de
feated in both houses. New Hamp-
shire also rejected it, but Governor
Bass has been trying to get the ques
ton reopened. In the other states the
situation is somewhat as follows: In
Connecticut the measure is pending,
with result in doubt. In Delaware the
legislature adjourned without action.
In Louisiana it was defeated last year.
but will be the issue in a campaign
before the people this year and will
almost surely be adopted in 1912. In
Massachusetts the senate Is in doubt.
In Minnesota favorable action is ex-
pected- In. Pennsylvania the measure
is held up, and the result is very
doubtful In Utah it was approved
in the house and defeated in the SEN
ate and in Virginia was approved by
the senate and defeated in the house.
West Virginia also had a divided YER
dict, and in Wyoming the legislature
adjourned without action. The out
come in the other states has already
been mentioned.
The Fight In New York.
Perhaps the hottest battle has occur
red in New York. When the amend
ment came before the legislature in
1910 Governor Hughes sent in a spe-
ciaI message Directing to its form. His
criticism was that the language of the
measure made it possible for the fed
eral government to tax the income
from state and municipal bonds. The
ground of his objection will appear
clearer by a reference to the wording
of the proposed amendment It is as
follows:
Article 16-The congress shall have
power TO lay and collect taxes On in
comes, from whatever source derived,
without apportfonment among the sew
eral states and without regard to any
census or enumeration"
The last clause has reference TO the
present constitutional provision that
direct federal taxes must be appor-
toned among the states according 10
population.
Hughes Objection.
The phrase to which Governor
Hughes objected and which has been
the bone OF contention In New Yors
and elsewhere is the one reading
from whatever source derived"
The contention Of advocates Of the
amendment is that the income from
state and city and all other bonds
should be taxed. as failure so 70 do
would result In creating a privileged