The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1911-07-12
MELTzER MAKES STRONG INCOME
 TAX ARGUMENT
Special to the Farmsr.)

Especial to the Farmsr.)
 Hartford. July 1ADiscussing the income tax amendment to the constitu- tion of the United States. and arguing for it's ratification. Representative Meltzer. of Bridgeport, spoke as fol- lows. yesterday:
 ."I fully agree with Senator Judson.
 who the other day, in discussing this Am endment in the Senate said, in ef- feet. as follows:
 We have reached an important stage in the history of this Consti- tutional Amendment inasmuch as-- we are close on the border line of States to ratify this Amendment-" Indeed we are near to the passing point. 31 States have acted patrioti- cally and passed this Amendment, but certainly do not agree with the senator, when he says" that the act this Amendment No, Mir. Speaker The Senator is all wrong on this question. Only states are necess- ary for the passage of this Amend ments and Sixteen almost all pro- gressive States to be heard from
 This Amendment is sure to be rati- fled by a sufficient number of States to make it the law of the land, and because of this it behooves us ust to- ,n be hi. careful . .tno how we we aot aot again ens this masasa safe by ana 1e fusing to ratify a needed Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. which wifi become the law of the land without our vote, the same as was done in the early history of this State by other Legislatures, Amendments to the Constitution to the lasting discredit of this State. The first Twelve Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the continuous existence of this na- tfon and the harmonious and effect i've working of the Constitution, were never ratified by this State. And so it is now with this Amendment
 The right to lay an Incline Tax importance to the existence of this nation. Let us not be again on the wrong side when such vital interests to the nation are at stake. In con- not forget that Amendment does not give to Congress any new power, which it did not have before, but 1t restores to Congress the power it had and exercised for over a century.
 Now it must be borne in mind that when the framers of the Constitu- tion were alive, when every phase of the Constitution was fully discuss ed in the press, whatever there was of it, especially in the Federalist. and not a word of criticism was then ut tered against it. Evidently it was then considered to be just and fair the Constitution and in keeping with the intent of the framers of the con- stitution. This view on the Income Tax has been held by the Supreme court for over century. Congress has. in eases of emergency. laid an Income Tax time and again, and whenever 1t was questioned in the Courts, the Supreme Court has always adhered to it's former decisions. The Springer case has been decided in 1880, (reported in 102c U. c. page 586.) And by the way Congress has never abus- charge Congress with extravaganza with Income Tax money. It's extrava- gance was always with money deriv7 1 ed from other sources. In 1895 new spirit entered this land. Conditions in this country of ours were chang right and wrong were changing. An and conflicting opinions were held by different classes even on questions of right and wrong. In that year the unpre- | cedented decision was rendered by the Supreme Court in the Pollack case. (reported in 157 U. S. page 42s.) wherein the Court reversed the deci- sions of the previous Supreme Courts of over a century old, and declared an act by Congress laying an Income Tax to be unconstitutional. Now un- der our system of government the de- cision of the Supreme court of the United States, right or wrong, be- comes the law of the land. By this decision Congress has been deprived of one of it's vital prerogatives of tax ing incomes in case of necessity, and by that much our government has been weakened. Taxation is one of the mainstays of our government. If you deprive it of the power of taxa tion you would destroy it, as it could not exist for any length of time with out it, if you partly take away that right from it you jeopardize its life that far. and it is therefore our duty to restore to the nation that right which the Supreme court deprived it of. Indeed this seems to be a one sided question. All reasonable argu- ments are in favor of the Amend ment. That taxation on incomes is the most just tax nobody will deny. It taxes each one according to his tion and benefits he derives from so- ciety, and no one can escape. And what are the arguments against 1t? A most fallacious argument was made against the Income Tax Amendment. | that because, forsooth, the West and | the South will spend the money. col | lected from the East and the North. | Therefore we must refuse to ratify | this amendment How ridiculous and absurd!
 I thought with the end of the Civ il War there ceased to be South and | North, East and West sections in this |