IK3W
JUNE 14, 190T
Commoner.
3
r t"a1
than property taxation, it Ib income taxation
which makes people pay according to the incorap
they enjoy. If a. ,man has, a .farm and you $&& .
him according to the value of his land he his
to pay it, even if he has no crop that year to
pay it with, but if you tax" his income, ahd he
has a largo tax to pay it Is because he nas a
large income with which to pay it, and if his
income decreases his tax also decreases.
But, my friends, there is such a thing as
farming out taxes, and I -want to speak for a
moment on that. Taxes are farmed out now in
three ways. First, when we allow manufactur-
ers to make tariff laws and decide how much
they will take from the rest of the people; sec
ond, when we allow municipal corporations to
determine how much they will charge without
any power to regulate them; third, when we
allow railroads to determine how much they
shall charge, and fourth, when we allow indus
trial monopolies to hold people by the throat
and take from their pockets whatever the man
agers of the monopolies desire. Now, when I
say that our protective tariff is a system by
which taxes are farmed out, I am aware that I
' may find some critics, but when our high tariff
laws are made they are made by the men who
want taxation, not by the man who pays he
taxes.
When I asked for a place on the ways and
means committee, or rather, asked an eastern
democrat to recommend me, he said, "There is
no chance." I bad a letter of introduction to him
from a friend of his; he was pleased to receive
the letter, and told me he would be glad to do
anything he could for me, and bo I told him I
wanted a place on that committee. He said "that
is impossible." I asked why. He said, "We put
men from the manufacturing states on that com
mittee." I said, "What about the consumers?"
He said, "We don't put them on that commit
tee." When the protectionists are in power,
they make up the committee from the men who
represent the tax eater and not the tax payer;
and these men make the laws in their own in
terests, and the manufacturers collect from the
people not, only as much as goes into the treas
ury, but sometimes ten times as much as goes
into the treasury. .Why, if a man proposed to
your city council tJaat he he allowed to collect
a certain amount for your city, and that he
would charge ten times as much for collecting
that amount as the amount he turned in, would
you, think of employing him? And yet we have
instances when the amount paid by the people
on account of the tariff is ten times the amount
turned into the treasury. This is not only farm
ing out the taxes., but it is paying a large com
mission for the collection of the taxes.
And so wo are farming out the taxes when
we charter a corporation which is not regulated
by competition. There are only two ways of
regulating corporations, one is by law and the
other is by competition, and when competition
is not possible, the people are taxed without
representation and without mercy unless there
is efficient regulation.
All over this land we have seen. this strug
gle between the people arid the corporations,
and we see it in this country today on the rail
road question. In 1896 the democratic plat
form declared for railroad regulation, in 1900
it did. so, and again in 1904. After ten years of
effort on our part, a republican president took
the lead on the subject, und he had the fight
of his life to get his -bill through the senate.
Ten years of effort to get regulation, and when
the time came It took the president and all his
influence, and the influence of all the democrats,
to get the bill through the senate, and at last
the president, in order to make it a republican
measure, compromised 'with the representatives
of the railroads in the United States senate. If
I am to talk on taxation, I must be allowed to
refer to the taxation this country is bearing to
day, because we do not regulate the corpora
tions as we ought to regulate them. Some con
stantly talk agalhst the government ownership
of railroads, but .say nothing against railroad
extortion and discrimination. Well we have not
reached that question, but we have reached the
question of our railroad regulation, and -I have
sometimes felt tempted to suggest that the man
who spends his time talking about the dangers
of government ownership could better serve the
p'ubllc by protecting the masses from the greed
of the corporations of today.
Seventeen years ago this fall I went down-
into the southeast corner of my state to make
a political speech. After speaking in the after-
noon at the county seat, I went out several miles
rlnto the country to speak at a schoolbouse. I
don'vt remember what I said that night, but I
'remember what a farmer said who also. made a
speech." He said he i-ented his land from the
'railroad. He added that the company let him
hold the title and pay the taxes, but that he
was really & tenant, for he got what was loft
after the company took what it wanted; and to
day bur railroads are doing much the same, and
the people who patronize them are simply get
ting for their crop what is left after the rail
roads take what they want The only regula
tion wo have thus far does not go to tho root
of tho matter.
What is the effect of our now rate law,
which was so hard to get? There are two offects
so far. One Is, It stopped rebates; that is good,
but what was tho pecuniary effect? Why, tho
railroads keep the money they formerly paid to
the favored shippers that is, tho railroads get
more money. What was the other effect? It
stopped passes, and that gave to the railroads
the money that those used to save who rode on
passes. So far, wo have increased tho revenues
of the road and that Is all that tho law has thus
far done. Rebates wore bad and it was neces
sary to stop them, but stopping rebates helps
the railroads. When the various states said:
"Well, now, we have given you this advantago
by stopping rebates and passes, wo will reduce
passenger and freight rates, and make you share
the advantage with the people." In some of the
states the railroads are so ungrateful for what
has been given them that they go into the courts
to try to keep people from having tho benefit of
tho two-cent rate. The railroads now want to
have all regulating power taken from the states
and lodged In the federal government. Tho
states are nearer to the people and the repre
sentatives more responsive to tho will of tho
people, and I am not willing that we shall sur
render any of the authority that the states now
have over the railroads.
But the effort of tho railroad managers to get
away from the states ought to tye a warning to
the people to keep in the state all the power
that the state now has. No wonder that the
railroads are willing to risk congress. They have
risked congress for a good many years; and I
am reminded of a joke that John Allen per
petrated. He came into the house one day after
General Wheeler had voted and asked: "How did
General Wheeler vote?" Some one told him that
General Wheeler voted -aye' He said: "I will
vote aye, for I followed General Wheeler through
four years of war, and he never led mo into any
danger." General Wheeler had to get up ,and
explain that John was never under his com
mand; but it was a good joke and it served its
purpose. I am not surprised that the railroads
are willing to have the power transferred to
Washington, for they have had the Unifced
States senate for twenty years, and it has pro
tected them in their extortion.
When you permit a monopoly to charge
whatever it wishes for the necessaries of life
you turn over the taxing power to them and In
the ;ase of the monopoly you do not even get
a commission. The steel trust, for instance, Is
collecting a tribute from the people of this
country. Every time you ship a pound of freight
you pay tribute to the steel trust, for you pay
your freight to the railroad, and the railroad
has to increase its charges because of the steel
trust, and within a week we have had the figures
given to us to show that the steel trust, In order
to increase its earnings, has made inferior
rails. When a man rides on the railroad today
he Is not only contributing by freights to the
large dividends of the steel trust, but his life is
less secure because of the greed of the steel
trust.
I have felt it wrts worth while to speak of
present day taxation without representation, for
it is not sufficient that we shall assemble here
and praise the man who Jed the fight against
the kind of injustice from which his people suf-'
. fered, and shut our eyes to the injustice from
" which our people suffer today. I hope that In
'Virginia a new crop of Patrick Henrys will arise,
who, speaking for the people, and reflecting
the conscience of the people, will insist that a
foreign despot having been driven from our land
no domestic despot shall be allpwed to take the
throne,
But, my friends, there is another phase of
this subject. Patrick Henry opposed taxation
without representation .that the people might
have justice, and he presented in a sentence one
of the reasons for representative government;
and this doctrine has spread around the world.
There is not a ciyllized land where this Idea has
not been planted and Is not growing. Representa
tive government! Tyhy? That the people may
rule, and this suggests the two schools of thought
on the Bubject -of representative government.
. Wherever they have had representative govern
ment they have had two theories; one theory is
that the representative is elected to think for the
people; the other theory is that the people think
for themselves and elect representatives to act
for the people. I do not know what your theory
is, but my theory and I believe the democratic
theory is that tho people do their own think
ing, and elect servants to do what tho people
want dono.
Wo are always talking about leaders, and
yet thoro are two theories In rogard to a leader;
one is that tho leade"r Is to think for tho people,
and tho other is that he is to think with ths
people. My idea is that ho thinks with the
people, not for tho people. I would not think
it an honor to bo tho leador of peoplo who did
not think; but it Is an honor to bo a co-laborer
with peoplo who do think. Somo one has said
that a leader Is a man who Is going in tho aarno
direction with tho peoplo, but a llttlo bit ahead.
I know of no better definition of a leador. If a
man is going to bo a leader ho must have fol
lowers, and peoplo will not follow him unless
ho is going in tho same direction they aro. Occa
sionally men have thought thomsolvos leaders,
and they Jook around, and found tho procession
going off on another street. This is not unusual,
and there is no more pathotlc sight in this coun
try than a leador without any followers, and yet
we have had them. And when it does occur it
occurs because the leader deserts his peoplo.
Tho representative, thoroforo, is a man who
represents and to emphasize this point, I will add
that if after a man is elected to represent tho
peoplo, a question arises whore he knows their
position to bo different from his, ho ought to
resign, and let them lect somebody to carry
out their wishes. He may go back before them
as a candidate and, telling them his views, ask
thorn whether they want him to carry out thoso
ideas, but no man who believes in tho right of
tho peoplo to govern themselves, will ombezzlo
public power and uso it as a personal asset. I
care not whether in embezzling it he uses it to
fill his own purse or to give expression to his
egotism; a man who thinks ho knows so much
more than tho peoplo who elected him that he
ignores their wishes, ought to be kept at homo.
Principles do not change, but conditions
sometimes require new JappHcations. For in
stance, suppose the law reads: "Thou shalt not,
kill a man with a stick or a stone." Then sup-'
pose a gun is invented. Tho old law will not
do, so you move to amend by adding tho words
"or gun." You would take an old principle and
bring It down to date. We know that the state
legislatures elected the senators for about ono
hundred years without protest but it kept get
ting worse and worse; finally an amendment was
proposed providing for tho election of senators
by the people and, Brother Tucker, you were on
that committee, if I am not mistaken, and you
fought for it and we carried it through tlio
Fifty-second congress. It was carried through'
the Fifty-third congress, and then a misfortune
befell the country we had a republican con
gress, which did not give the subject considera
tion; and then another republican congress, and'
it did not, but the sentiment continued to grow,'
and the third republican congress acted favor
ably and then another and then another. Five
times the popular br .nch of congress has, by
more than a two-thirds vote, proposed an amend
ment that will make this change, and nearly
two-thirds of the states of the union have de
clared for it. I am in favor of it. It has boon
in the democratic national platform twice, and
it will be in tho next democratic platform. I ,
believe in it. Why? because I believe a senator '
should be the representative of the people, and ,
that the people, and not the corporations, should
decide who shall occupy tho seats in this highest t
legislative body in the world.
Now so far, I know I am not going to en
counter any opposition for I know that the man '
who opposes the popular election of senators
will not have time to attack me; ho will be busy,
defending himself.
But there is another proposition, and I am
going to venture to mention it, You may not'
agree with me, but one advantage about living'
in this country is that even when people do not
agree with you, they let you live. Some peoplo I
Jiave expressed regret that I have been defeated,
or that I have not seen all the reforms carried ' '
out, "but it Is much better thanit used to be;,
they used to hang reformers; nbw they simply j
defeat them. My Virginia father taught me j
something that has been worth more to mo than. !
if he had left me all the wealth Mr. Rockefeller
will leave his children. He taught me that I !
could afford to be In the minority, but that I '
could not afford to be in the wrong on any sub-
ject. Do you believe that the representative
ought to represent? Do you believe that ren-r
resentatives should follow the wishes rof their
constituents? I think you do. If you do you '
are willing to go a step further, and give tha )
people a method by which they can control their
representatives. ' ' .
I am willing to go that far. I referred in '
New York to the initiative and referendum, and)
some of the editors acted as i they had never
41
i
t
f.
i
I
i