The Washington herald., 1913-08-29
SPLIT IN RANKS
ON income TAX
Democratic Insurrection viii
Make 1t Necessary to
Hold Caucus.
STARTED BY AMENDMENT
Plan Proposed by Senator La Toilette
for Higher Rate on Larger An
nuities Voted Down.

ate yesterday over the income tax hal
probably made II necessary for tht
Democratic Senators to hold a caucus Il
compose differences and revise tbs
amendment. 1t was said yesterday thai
the caucus would probably be held moi
later than Monday night, and possibly
as early as Saturday night.
The trouble arose over the defeat OF
an amendment offered by Senator Ii
Toilette Wednesday evening, which wa
voted down in the Senate yesterday,
This amendment proposed that a higher
percentage be imposed on the larger in
comes than is carried by the bill, and
probably a lower one than l per cent on
the smaller incomes. The debate on this
feature of the bill, led by the Progress
sive Republicans Wednesday made such
an impression on the Democratic side
that when the bill was taken up yester-
day morning il was found that a con-
siderable !nsurgent movement had start
ed to amend the bill. 1t was claimed that
twenty-seven Democrats out of fifty were
demanding that the tax on larger in
comes be increased.
Before the roll call came on Senator
La FOllette's amendment, the Democratic
leaders had practically agreed that the
extra tax on incomes of more than 500.
900 shall be per cent, with an increaS
iLg rate that will amount to 10 per cent
on incomes of sjOOOOO. The present rata
carried by the bill on all incomes over
100000 is only , per cent The Demo-
cratic leaders also have promised to give
seious consideration to the eXpediency of
increasing the rate on incomes above
10000.
Vote Is ~ to II.
Senator La FolIette's amendment which
proposed a rate starting at per cent on
incomes of $4,000 and amounting 10 IL
Per cent on incomes of 100000, the per-
centage gradually increasing, was defeat
ed by a vote of 43 to i.
Senator Vardaman broke from his DEM
Ocratic colleagues and voted for La Fol-
lette's amendment. Senators Reed, As
hurst. and Thompson stated that they
had been assured that the Democratic
leaders would change the amendment,
and on such assurance they would vote
against the amendment. Senator Will
iams> appeared to be much irritated over
the attitude Of the Democratic Senators.
and declared that no one was authorized
to give assurances that the income tax
amendment would be modified in the way
suggested, but later he admitted that the
matter would be reconsidered.
Twelve regular Republicans voted with
Allt LtlllONA ats dtdlll5A lllt La Olltllc
as they did Wednesday on
similar amendments.
After Senator La FOllette's amendment
had been disposed of, Senator Bristow of
Kansas proposed another, which came
within six votes of being adopted and
which commanded all of the Republican
support. The vote was Sc to 30. Senator
Bristow's amendment proposed a gradu-
ated increase of L. of per cent on each
$4,000 increase of income up to s1O0.0eO
Senator BristOw explained that he had
made a careful estimate and found that
his amendment would raise the same
amount of revenue as that estimated to
flow from the Democratic bill
Want Exemption Lowered.
The regular Republicans urged that the
exemption be lowered. Senator Town
send and Senator Sutherland urged that
the exemption be on incomes below $3.50.
while Senator McCumber proposed an
10 place tax of lilo of per
cent on incomes of $1,cOO increasing it
up to l-2 per cent on incomes
Of 100000 and over. This was defeated.
without a roll call
Senator Poindexter then offered an
to tax incomes of over $780,
100 and up TO $4,000 at 10 per cent, and
was lost. Il to L.
Senator Sterling Of South Dakota.
wanted the bill amended to exclude eX-
emptions for losses in business sus-
tained through speculation, but this was
lost. One of the interesting Controver-
sizes of the debate was over a motion by
Senator Cummins to strike out thirteen
lines in the first part of paragraph B.
which define what an income is for
purposes of taxation. Senator Cummins
insisted that Congress had no right to
define an income and that the courts
alone could do that. His amendment
was lost.
Another struggle was over an amend
nent offered by Senator Norris, increas-
ng the exemption on account of minor
children so that it would allow $50 for
zach child. At present the proposal is
% ailow 500 on account of each child
Ip to a maximum of $1,000. Mr.. Norris
was lost, q to g. a party
'ote.
Good Progress Made.
Considerable progress was made read
ng the text of the income tax provi-
ion. It comprises more than forty pages
# the bill and the reading clerk has
covered about half of it. 1t was con-
idered very doubtful whether the Senate
would be able to conclude with the in
ome tax feature before the early part
Il next week, and probably it may go
'ver into the middle of the week. There
S little expectation now that the bill
an be completed and a. final vote
cached by the end of next week, as
chairman Simmons had hoped. The es-
innate generally made now by the lead
RS in the Senate is for a vote about
september Is.
IL . &C n1r1rcrnrc cnMAnn