The Climax-Madisonian. (Richmond, Madison County, Ky.) 1914-1917, 1915-08-11

md executive committee should zee
themselves fully informed of wha
ranspires at Washington in the wa
# Federal legislation bearing on thi
subject which so vitality affects you
interests and your prosperity
AS a concrete example / will illus
rate with one case OF record. If 20
will permit me, l will quote in ful
he comment in the Washington BIZ
eau of the United States Tobacco
Journal, published in New York CITY
If date July 5, 1915. quoting: "Grat
lated Tax Amendment Defeated Again
Iuillotine Hitchcock Thereupon Bolt
Democratic Caucus Senator O'Gol
nan of New York Joins the Tobacco
Trade Executioners."
Washington, d. c.,
July 2, 1913.
Senator Hitchcock's amend
ment proposing a graduated tax
on the output of tobacco facto-
ries was defeated in the Demo
cratic caucus of the Senate to-
day by a vote of % to Is. Hav-
ing been defeated before the
Democrats of the Finance Com
mittee some weeks ago, Senator
Hitchcock took the amendment
before the Democratic caucus, but
lost. He will press the amend
ment before the Senate when the
tariff bill is up for discussion.
Debate over the amendment
consumed parts of the sessions
of the caucus of two days, Tues
day afternoon and Wednesday
morning. 1t was perhaps the
most long-Grawn-out of the dis
cussions over the tariff, with the
exception perhaps of the sugar
and wood schedules. Senator
Hitchcock was SO disgruntled
over the rejection by the caucus
of his amendment that he left
the caucus in a huff.
1.-THE Nebraska Senator made a
lengthy statement to the caucus
in behalf of his amendment. COW
ering the features of the amend
ment which he had previously
discussed in the Senate when he
first proposed it. He was sup
ported by Senators Kern of In
diana and O'Gorman of New
York, while Senators Bryan of
Florida, James of Kentucky, Gore
of Oklahoma and Simmons of
North Carolina, the latter Chair
man of the Finance Committee,
tor Hitchcock did not offer his
second amendment, which pro-
porations over certain figure.
Senator Hitchcock was seen after
the caucus by a representative of
the United States Tobacco Jour
nal, but declined to discuss the
matter in any way.
THE proponents of the tobacco
tax argued that it was a revenue
producer and properly belonged to
a tariff bill which was for the
purpose of raising revenue. They
also pointed out that it was de-
signed to check the operations of
the trust and had been favored
by the Attorney General.
THE opposition took the ground
that the idea of taxing any in
dustry out of existence was a
new principle and should be thor
oughly considered apart from a
tariff bill. AS it was a trust
measure, they declared that if it
was applied to the tobacco trust
it should apply to all trusts, and
was therefore class legislation
as directed against one industry
only. They also asserted that the
trust question ought not to be
injected into the tariff. The de-
sire was also apparent to pre-
vent the bill from being loaded
down with all sorts of amend
ments.
at is reported that Senator
Hitchcock was so angry over the
rejection of his amendment that
he threatened to bolt the caucus.
Several of his friends are work
ing with him to prevent a bolt,
for the Democrats have no votes
to spare on the tariff bill. The
large vote for the amendment in
the caucus shows it to be more
popular than was supposed"
You will observe that this bi
which came before the Democrat
Senate caucus July 2, 1913, framed
behalf of you growers of Kentucl
and aimed at the Tobacco Trust, WI
drawn by Democratic Senator-fro
where? From Nebraska, in wbit
state there is not a pound of tobac,
grown for the market 1t was kill,
in caucus by only five votes. l a
informed that the then Attorney &c
eral McReynolds considered this b
constitutional, and approved it, as
is on the same principle as that of Il
graduated Federal Income Tax mes
ure. 1t is a matter of record that Il
question of constitutionality did n
bar these Senators from voting f
this income tax.
The courts have, confessed thel
selves incapable of breaking up t
tobacco trust. Yet, by reasons of Il
provisions in this Hitchcock bill tn
any company having rs per cent
the stock of another company, or ha
ing one-third of the directors of a
other company, which is the case wi
the companies comprising the tobac
trust, this graduated Federal excl
tax would have imposed annual
upon that trust many millions of d.
lars, which sum would also not on
go towards easing your burdens
taxation, but would prove a very pc
erful factor for a genuine dissoluti
of the trust. Why should that su
of money be permitted to be TAX
from you growers to go to swell t
abnormal profits of the trust?
AS Democratic administration W
forced by the extraordinary con,
tions of the times to levy war t
to maintain its internal revenue, IL
measure would appear to be one
the least obnoxious forms of ext
taxation.
However, 1t is not within the pre-
=