Gilpin observer., 1916-08-10
HUGHES AND THE INCOME TAX


Hughes, as justice of the Supreme
Court of the United States, was re-
moved from active politics and par
ticipated in NO discussions Of political
issues.
Prior to that time for several years
he had, however, been AN active fig
ure and as the political leader OF his
party in a great state was called up
cn frequently ito give his views upon
questions of governmental import
ance.
Some of those views have now
come forward like CHESTS of an un-
fortunate past to give him pause in
his pursuit Of further distinction and
doubtless cause him some grief
Already his organs and advocates
are in the harras sing difficulty of ex-
planning away his attitude as Govern
or of New York on the proposed
amendment to the Federal Constitu-
ton to tax incomes.
One clause in his message to the
state legislature on the subject has
been and, is being urged too in at
tempt to create the impression that
he favored the amendment However
those who would thus quiet his crit
les and deceive the public, dare not
quote the message in full.
The facts are these:
On January fifth, 1910, as governor
he transmitted to the legislature
certified copy of the congressional
resolution proposing an income tax
amendment to the Federal constitu-
ton. He accompanied it by a special
message, the concluding lines of
which were, Il therefore deem 1T my
duty as governor of the state to re-
commend that this proposed amend
ment should not be ratified"
Governor Hughes was known to be
opposed to the amendment. AS a
politician. however, he found it nee
essary to soften his message by an
attemptedly adroit plea that might
lessen popular evaporation towards
his position.
Therefore, in his message, he at
the outset proclaimed himself as be-
lieving aS principle that the "pow-
er to tax income should be held by
the Federal Government, SO as prop
erly to equip it with the means of
meeting national exigencies."
The proposed amendment, however
he could not sanction for the reason,
alleged by him, that incomes derived
from bonds issued by the state it.
self or those issued by municipali-
ties under the states authority should
net be taxed. Such an amendment
as that proposed would place the
borrowing capacity of the state and
of it's governmental agencies at.>the
mercy of the Federal taxing power. "
| Opponents of the proposed amend
ment were highly pleased with the
governors message. 1t was the re-
sponse of faithful servant to them
who had SO often and so unstinted-
ly contributed to the success of his
party.
His party, too at least ITS legisla-
tive representatives, opposed his
message, for the New York Legisla-
ture, Republican in both branches
promptly voted to reject the amend
ment. This action took place April
Goth, 1910.
Five days later President Taft ap
of the Supreme Court of the United
States.
Just one year later when Governor
Dix, u Democrat, was in the govern
ors chair at Albany, the legislature
did ratify the amendment which Gov
ernor Hughes and a Republican leg.s
lature had rejected.
The income tax law las now beer
in operation for several years. L
has the sanction Of the American
people. 1t was drafted by Demo
cratic member of congress and EN-
acted by a Congress Democratic IL
both branches.
AN this in spite of the positive ant
fcrceful opposition of the now presi
dontial nominee of the Republican
, party.
In the meanwhile, so satisfactor
has proven the workings of the in
come tax law. so thoroughly has
. established the wisdom and states
0 manship of his supporters and $
thoroughly has it disproven the argr
= ments of its opponents and their ea
planatcry pleas in resistance, tina
1t win remain upon our Federal sta
. tr.te books for all time.
3, Ecr daJ;,tous t,a craon, and cot