Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-08-29
Democratic Senator Pours a
Verbal Br0adSide Into
Colleagues.
REFUSES TO BE BOUND
on CORPORATION TAX
Introduces Amendment Which Places
Greater Burdens Upon
Monopolies.

democratic caucus OF the Senate and the
democratic members OF the finance COM
mittee by Senator Hitchcock Of Ne
braska, himself a democrat, when, in
defiance Of the caucus, he offered his
amendment in the Senate today placing
an increased tax upon corporations
which monopolize trade in any partic-
ular line.
cock said:
Caucus rule renders public debates
in the Senate farcical Senators will not
even remain In their seats to hear them.
Caucus rule kills the very spirit of legis-
lation.''
Scores Attempt to Bind.
Speaking Of the attempt Of the demo-
cratic Caucus to bind the senator's to
vote for the income tax provision of the
tariff bill as framed by the caucus, he
said:
Amendments have been offered on the
republican side by senators who nave
made a study of the income tax idea.
They are not contrary to any democratic
doctrine. Why, then, must democrats be
required by caucus rule to vote against
them?
first one offered by a democrat to this
tariff bill in many weeks OF discussion.
it is proper that I should explain and
justify my action in offering It
I'm the first place. the pending DILL
like most tariff bills. is a party measure.
Being a party measure its tariff sched-
ules were very properly submitted finally
to the democratic caucus. l do not oo-
ject to that It seems to me neces-
sary evil. With several thousand items
to be tixed in a party bill. it may well
be argued that the only practical way
was to submit them to a vote OF demo-
cratic senators in caucus l submitted
to this control and restriction OF my In
dependence in matters OF detail as Otners
did The result has been that as we
have considered item after item in the
tartr the democratic senators have
voted soiidly together with the exception
of two senator's from Louisiana on sew
eral items for wei. known reasons.
More Than Tariff Bill.
but this bill is more than tariff bill.
It contains other provisions for raising
revenue and regulating business. On
them senators should be freed from eau
Gus control They should be at liberty
to vote according to individual prefer
ence and conviction. Take for instance
the income tax section which we are now
considering. Why should it not be
amended here upon the floor of the
Senate If debate convinces senator's that
it should be? Why should senators be
expected to be bound by the hasty deci-
siOns Of q secret caucus on details OF the
income tax? Why should they be expect
ed to vote down every amendment, how
ever good, simply because 1t comes from
the other side of the chamber? There is
no party necessity for this destruction OF
individual independence as there may be
in the tariff schedules.
For one I am not enthusiastic over
caucus legislation and I CANNOT give my
consent to be bound by caucus rule any
more than is absolutely necessary.
Notified the Caucus.
I'VE have reached point where feel
free to take another course. 1 feel justi-
fed in offering this amendment for the
taxation Of trusts, because I notified the
caucus that proposed to do SO. I frs,
asked the caucus to leave me free tc
offer in the open Senate my amendments
for the taxation Of trusts. and to leave
democratic senators free to vote upon
the amendments without caucus re-
straint. That was all wanted. 1t was
refused. Then the senator from Arizona
Mr.. Ashurst, offered in the caucus my
amendment for the tax on the tobacco
trust. After heated controversy the
tobacco amendment came to an open vote
in the caucus. The vote was IS for il
and q against It, The chairman Of the
finance committee described the occasion
as a battle royal. I do not agree with
him. 1t was not even fair test OF
caucus strength, because there was a eau
Gus within a caucus. I refer to the finance
committee. Its nine democratic members
voted as unit in the caucus. regardless
0f Ind vi q
within wheel. machine within a ma
chine. Finding that I could not preserve
my independence or freedom as a SEN
ator If I remained In the caucus. I with
drew from it. stating. however. that al
far as the tariff schedules are concerned
1 would accept the judgment of the eau
Gus, and have done so.
Explains Amendment.
The amendment here offer changes
the rate of corporation tax as far as
trusts are concerned. The regular cor
poration tax is 1 per cent. 1 propose
that if a corporation reaches the di-
mansions Of trust its corporation taa
shall be higher. II 1t controls one.
quarter of the business of the cOun.
! try in any particular line my amend
ment makes it's tax per cent OF 1T
net earnings; il 1t controls one-thire
Oh the business OF the COuulIy 1lS ld1
becomes 10 per cent; II 1t controls one
half or more of the business OF the
country its tax becomes 20 per cent.
1.-The effect of this would be to raise
considerable revenue and to render
monopoly less profitable. As 1t Is now
big interests are tempted by the profits
| of monopoly to get just as near Z
| il as possible That is why trusts arr
formed. The fear OF prosecution is tn
only restraint. The taxation of trusts
will take away the monopoly proht
and at the same time take away tn
temptation 1t will give those extra
profits to the people In the form o
revenue. We have expended millions
of dollars in prosecuting trusts Whel
simply by taxing them we would hav'
secured large revenue and cnecke'
the evil.