The Washington herald., 1915-01-01
Says Tariff and Income
Tax Cypress the Women
Premium Placed on Divorce and Penalty on Home
Life, Says Letter to Sutfragists.

A protest by a woman against the
income tax section of the Underwood
tariff law, on the ground that 1t dis
eliminates against women, was forward
ed some time ago to DR.. Anna Howard
Shaw, president of the National Amer
lean Woman Suffrage Association, ac-
companied by the following letter:
Dear Madam-I am inClosing a criti-
cism. sound in law and sound in fact
of the tariff act of October 3, 1913, which
discriminates outra geOusly against the
vOteless American woman. Please have
il read before your association and have
such action taken TO remedy the dis
elimination complained of as your hon
Orable body may deem fit and proper
Unsurmountable obstacles affecting my
position prevent my openly joining your
movement. but l am with you in spirit
to the end.
From what / learn from conversations
legislators favorable. and women Citi-
zens unfavorable to votes for women,
conclude a modified vote for them could
be more easily obtained. That mOdifica-
ton is, votes for taX-paying women. In
discriminate or unqualified votes for
women appear to be the stumbling block.
Sincerely, =. q. Il.
The article. which is an interesting
analysis of the effect OF the law on the
women of the country, is entitled Dis
elimination Against Women Without
Votes by the Tariff Act OF October 5.
1873" II follows:
That the tariff act of October :. 1919,
unjustly discriminates against women.
cannot be denied. Will women supinely
submit to such injustice and disCrimi:lH-
ton? Should they submit? They should
not and will not.
American women having no vote, VIII 'le
abroad this summer, purchased aiSrettes
and paid their honest money for them,
to foreign shOpkeepeTs before the new
tariff act became a law, but arriving
afterwards in their alleged land Of the
free and home of the brave. were. with
out previous notification. ruthlessly and
fOrCibly despOilsd of their property, the
said aigrettes, by offensive customs
subs of the United States. So muCn
for the effect or operation of the new
tariff law on impOTtatiOns by 'voteless
American women" How were 'men with
votes" affected in their importatiOns, by
this same tariff law? We shall see.
What the Men Did.
The United States government. through
the Treasury Department the same
which seized and confisCated the aigrettes
from womes without votes, willfully and
knowingly permitted and assisted men
with votes to import dutiable goods dur
ing the operation of the high tariff act,
actually amounting to value to SlO6, ,OOO
600, deposit the same "in bond in gov
ernment warehouses, retain them there
duty free" for several months, and
subsequently remove them under the low
rates Of the tariff act of October 3, 1913,
thus defrauding honest tax payers, and
the United States government, through
evasion OF the payment Of the lawful
I. .n..s.-
of Importation. Is this equal or fair treat
ment of American citizens, or is it dis
elimination against women without votes,
ia favor of men with votes?
II is safe to say no American woman
citizen, without votes, escaped the vigi-
lance of the United States Treasury GUS
toms subs and retained her aigrette,
but has the same Treasury Department
been equally vigilant in preventing men
with votes from violating the statutes
and the treaty with Mexico, by snug
Cling munitions of war across the border
Of that nation with which We are at
peace. as evidenced by the disposition Of
our battleships in her harbOrs?
A Premium on Divorce.
Section of this tariff act. the income
tax law. Csee \ and c. PIP. 3 and 81, pro-
vides a punitive measure for married
persons. and according to the financial
status of single persons. is a protective
or prohibitive tariff against matrimony,
a financial premium on divorce and
5"paratlon, or the disruption of the mar
rage vow, race suicide, and indecent liv-
ing OF married persons by inhicting
upon taxable married persons who live
together with their own husbands or
wives an annual impost or fine OF 5000
Read the law yourself. 1t places the
burden OF its construction upon the tax