man at least one market--the market of the INTERNAL REVENUE. (Continued.) The bill made changes in the internal revenue as follows: First. Abolishing the tax on dealers in leaf tobacco....... Second. Abolishing the tax on dealers in manufactured tobacco. Third. Abolishing the tax on the manufacturers of tobacco...... Fourth. Abolishing the tax on manufacturers of cigars Fifth. Abolishing the tax on peddlers of tobacco........ Sixth. A reduction of the tax on smoking and manufactured tobacco from 8 cents to 4 cents per pound... Seventh. A reduction of the tax on snuff from 8 cents to 4 cents per pound......... Eighth. The abolition of the tax on retail dealers in leaf tobacco....... $48, 570. 88 1,280, 015. 98 5, 128. 25 120, 195. 53 127, 010. 88 8, 538, 449. 97 322, 544.781 270.84 But this charge of bad faith is unwarranted, as the Republicans have always treated the internal-revenue system as a war tax, to be resorted to only in an extraordinary emergency, and to be abandoned as soon as the exigencies of the Treasury would permit. They have always contended that the tariff must be the regular source of revenue for ordinary expenses, as it has been from the foundation of the Government. Hence the above frequent reductions whenever they have had power. And hence, also, their declared principles in national platforms. INTER STATE COMMERCE. (See Transportation.) INCOME TAX. IN THIS COUNTRY AN INCOME TAX OF ANY SORT IS ODIOUS AND WILL BRING ODIUM UPON ANY PARTY BLIND ENOUGH TO IMPOSE IT. -NEW YORK Herald, DEC, 29, 1893. INCOME TAX A DEATH KNELL. PREPARE FOR THE FUNERAL OF THE POLITICAL PARTY WHICH IMPOSES SUCH A BURDEN. A LANDSLIDE OF DISAPPROVAL. EVERYWHERE THE MEASURE IS VEHEMENTLY CONDEMNED, IRRESPECTIVE OF PARTISANSHIP. If the leaders of the Democrats have any regard for the success of the national party they would better drop the proposed income tax as speedily as possible. If they would like to learn with ease and accuracy just what the masses of the voters all over the land think of that un-American form of raising a revenue let them read the heaped up expressions of opinion which the HERALD has published on the subject. have been purchasing flour from Minneapolis -Senator H. C. Hansbrough, North Dakota. In these columns merchants, bankers, railroad men, journalists, lawyers, doctors, millionaires and wage earners from North, South, East and West have emphatically condemned the measure and given shrewd, logical, unanswerable reasons for the faith that is in them. The HERALD to-day presents another convincing array of similar testimony.-New York Herald, Dec. 6, 1893. INCOME TAX. MANNING REPLIES TO CARLISLE. The Cleveland scheme of taxing incomes from corporate investments is defended by Secretary Carlisle : 66 There appears to be no good reason why the contributions for the support of the public service generally should not be equalized as nearly as possible by including this kind of property in the Federal revenue system." Turning to the annual report for 1886 by Mr. Cleveland's first Secretary of the Treasury during his previous administration, we find a very positive expression on the subject of Federal taxes on incomes: "Direct taxes must be apportioned among the several States according to their population. Our experience of the difficulties and inequalities of the direct tax, when applied to land, of which a square foot in one place is costlier than one hundred square miles in another place; or, when applied to individual incomes (the most direct tax conceivable, for when paid it cannot be shifted; it has no repercussion, which is the only common feature of the taxes held to be direct before war had disturbed the vision of courts and legislatures) under the prescribed rule of apportionment to the States according to population, confines their utility to State purposes, and excludes them from the first purview of Federal taxation." That is Daniel Manning's comment on John G. Carlisle's proposition.New York Sun, Dec. 21, 1893. INCOME TAX. [By telegraph to the N. Y. Herald.] TO THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD: Coronado, Cal., Mar. 7, 1894. Senator Mills, in a recent article, states that five hundred million dollars of revenue are required for the coming financial year. The expenditures for 1893 were, according to a Treasury report, $459,374,887; for 1892, they were $415,953,806; for 1891, $421,304,470, and for 1890, $358,618,584. At five hundred millions for the first Democratic year, it is clear that the "period of economy and reform" of which Mr. Tilden used to talk has not set in with great ferocity. But Mr. Mills says we need to raise five hundred millions. All right. It is a big sum of money, but if the Democrats cannot carry on the man at least one market-the market of the INTERNAL REVENUE. (Continued.) The bill made changes in the internal revenue as follows: First. Abolishing the tax on dealers in leaf tobacco....... Second. Abolishing the tax on dealers in manufactured tobacco Third. Abolishing the tax on the manufacturers of tobacco.... Fourth. Abolishing the tax on manufacturers of cigars Fifth. Abolishing the tax on peddiers of tobacco...... Sixth. A reduction of the tax on smoking and manufactured tobacco from 8 cents to 4 cents per pound............... Seventh. A reduction of the tax on snuff from 8 cents to 4 cents per pound......... Eighth. The abolition of the tax on retail dealers in leaf tobacco......... $48, 570. 88 1, 280, 015. 98 5, 128. 25 120, 195. 53 127, 010. 88 8, 538, 449. 97 322, 544. 78) 270.84 But this charge of bad faith is unwarranted, as the Republicans have always treated the internal-revenue system as a war tax, to be resorted to only in an extraordinary emergency, and to be abandoned as soon as the exigencies of the Treasury would permit. They have always contended that the tariff must be the regular source of revenue for ordinary expenses, as it has been from the foundation of the Government. Hence the above frequent reductions whenever they have had power. And hence, also, their declared principles in national platforms. INTER STATE COMMERCE. (See Transportation.) INCOME TAX. IN THIS COUNTRY AN INCOME TAX OF ANY SORT IS ODIOUS AND WILL BRING ODIUM UPON ANY PARTY BLIND ENOUGH TO IMHOSE IT. -NEW YORK Herald, DEC, 29, 1893. INCOME TAX A DEATH KNELL. PREPARE FOR THE FUNERAL OF THE POLITICAL PARTY WHICH IMPOSES SUCH A BURDEN. A LANDSLIDE OF DISAPPROVAL. EVERYWHERE THE MEASURE IS VEHEMENTLY CONDEMNED, IRRESPECTIVE OF PARTISANSHIP. If the leaders of the Democrats have any regard for the success of the national party they would better drop the proposed income tax as speedily as possible. If they would like to learn with ease and accuracy just what the masses of the voters all over the land think of that un-American form of raising a revenue let them read the heaped up expressions of opinion which the HERALD has published on the subject. have been purchasing flour from Minneapolis -Senator H. C. Hansbrough, North Dakota. In these columns merchants, bankers, railroad men, journalists, lawyers, doctors, millionaires and wage earners from North, South, East and West have emphatically condemned the measure and given shrewd, logical, unanswerable reasons for the faith that is in them. The HERALD to-day presents another convincing array of similar testimony.-New York Herald, Dec. 6, 1893. INCOME TAX. MANNING REPLIES TO CARLISLE. The Cleveland scheme of taxing incomes from corporate investments is defended by Secretary Carlisle : "There appears to be no good reason why the contributions for the support of the public service generally should not be equalized as nearly as possible by including this kind of property in the Federal revenue system." Turning to the annual report for 1886 by Mr. Cleveland's first Secretary of the Treasury during his previous administration, we find a very positive expression on the subject of Federal taxes on incomes: "Direct taxes must be apportioned among the several States according to their population. Our experience of the difficulties and inequalities of the direct tax, when applied to land, of which a square foot in one place is costlier than one hundred square miles in another place; or, when applied to individual incomes (the most direct tax conceivable, for when paid it cannot be shifted; it has no repercussion, which is the only common feature of the taxes held to be direct before war had disturbed the vision of courts and legislatures) under the prescribed rule of apportionment to the States according to population, confines their utility to State purposes, and excludes them from the first purview of Federal taxation.” That is Daniel Manning's comment on John G. Carlisle's proposition.New York Sun, Dec. 21, 1893. INCOME TAX. [By telegraph to the N. Y. Herald.] TO THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD: Coronado, Cal., Mar. 7, 1894. Senator Mills, in a recent article, states that five hundred million dollars of revenue are required for the coming financial year. The expenditures for 1893 were, according to a Treasury report, $459,374,887; for 1892, they were $415,953,806; for 1891, $421,304,470, and for 1890, $358,618,584. At five hundred millions for the first Democratic year, it is clear that the "period of economy and reform" of which Mr. Tilden used to talk has not set in with great ferocity. But Mr. Mills says we need to raise five hundred millions. All right. It is a big sum of money, but if the Democrats cannot carry on the without return, workmen out of employ, chil- INCOME TAX. (Continued.) country for less, the taxpayers will, I suppose, have to stand it. Half a billion of revenue, however, does not necessitate the enacting of a new, very odious and inquisitorial income tax, with a brand new set of officeholders, or taxeaters, to take their large share out of the taxpayers' pockets. There is no necessity for that, and the Democrats, even with a Populist alliance, are not so strong in the country that they can venture on an experiment of this kind. HATEFUL TAXATION. It is a doubly hateful form of taxation, because, as the highest authorities have stated, it cannot be fully and honestly collected, and leads to fraud, false swearing and blackmail. The income tax is the most odious of taxes, and it is, besides that, unjust, for it levies the same percentage from the hard working salaried man, whose family depends entirely on what, by his skill, he can gain, as upon the man who lives on an invested fortune. It thus puts a penalty on skill and thrift. Mr. Mills and his fellow Democrats propose to lay this income tax, hateful and unjust and impossible of full collection, inquisitorial and leading to fraud and blackmail-they propose to lay this new tax without the least necessity. Suppose they do it? Suppose they make the Democratic party as odious as the income tax? Is that worth while for them? CHARLES NORDHOFF. INCOME TAX, COMMUNISM PURE AND SIMPLE. The income tax appendance to the Wilson bill was not devised primarily for the purpose of raising revenue, though the deficiency of revenue created by that bill was increased by amendments passed for the purpose of affording a pretext for the socialistic imposition. It is not expected to yield more than a small revenue, insufficient, even with the other internal taxation of the Populist scheme, to make up for the deficiency created by the preposterous Wilson bill. It was devised, primarily, to establish in Democratic legislation the unDemocratic, un-American, communistic, and unconstitutional principle of class legislation. It is, to use the words of Tom Johnson in Tuesday's debate on the measure, "a proposition for the poor to tax the rich, and for the majority to tax the minority," made on the theory that "the bill will be popular because it exempts the great mass of the voters." It is advocated on the base and communistic ground that as it discriminates against only 80,000 or 100,000 of the people, the loss of votes by reason of it will be trifling. Rejoicing in the establishment of this communistic principle of plunder by the Democratic party, the Populist Pence expressed the gratitude his harum-scarum party "owe to the Democrats: our sincere thanks and |
