$fi-jfs- try1-,s''e!t"wwy'
-TWfltlV '.
'
!
The Commoner
MAY 27, 1910
-,&
reached the roll call stage, and until the Sara
toga senator, yielding to the importunities of
the author of the document, cast his vote for if,
its fate was in doubt. Twenty-six votes were
nedded to put the resolution through, and
twenty-five senators had voted for it when the
clerk reached the last name on the roll. Sena
tor Davenport then demanded that the' names
of absent senators be called, and it was then,
that Brackett was prevailed on to provide the
one vote necessary for favorable action. Twenty
senators voted against the resolution. What
effect the action of the upper house will have
on the question of New York state ratifying the.
income tax proposition remains to be seen. The
assembly by one vote defeated an identical reso
lution because of the backsliding of Tammany
Assemblyman Mitchell E. Friend, who on a pre
vious occasion had voted for it. The friends
of the fncome tax resolution have insisted since
that the Tammany assemblyman was rewarded
by being assured, of his seat In the lower house,
which had been contested by his republican op
ponent. The Davenport resolution will now
go to the committee on rules of the assembly,
which is under complete control of Speaker
Wadsworth, who joined forces with Governor
Hughes to defeat the measure. Whether the
rules committee can be compelled to disgorge
the Davenport resolution remains to be seen.
The indications are that it will only be released,
after a more exciting battle than has so far oc
curred. The opponents of the Davenport reso
lution resorted to every parliamentary trick to
night to defer final action upon it. Several sub- -stitute
resolutions imposipg a state income tax,
providing for an investigation of the subject and
for developing the state resources in indirect
taxation were proposed and voted down."
ONLY 'ONE democrat Baync by name voted,
against the income tax in' the New York
state senate.' The World's correspondent says:
"The m'oBt pretentious speech in favor of -indorsing
the Taft Income tax plan was made
by Mr. Davenport. 'A uniform Income tax, such
as this,' he said, 'upon all fields of Investment,
would leave every field of investment relatively
as strong 'as it was before, and there would be
no appreciable change in the price of state
and municipal securities, and no injury to the
instrumentalities of state crpdit. There would
then be no -taxless .field to which capital "could'
Hot to get rid of the uniform tax, and So there
would he no change in the price of securities
as the result of the general Uniform tax upon
all- fields Davenport contended that jt wa&
'politically unthinkable' that congress would im
pose a tax aimed solely at state and municipal
bonds, and thus seek to destroy the taxing pow
ers of the states. The idea of a state income
tax was scoffed at. 'Either the source of the
Income or the taxpaying citizen slips over the
state line,' said the speaker. Answering the
argument that New York would bear the great
proportion of the burden of a federal tax Mr.
Davenport said that, being the richest state in
the union, it ought to do so. Declaring that an
income tax was the surest avenue of escape
from radicalism, he predicted that if the legis
lature was bound to have the burden continue
to be borne by the poor man a spirit of discon
tent and radicalism would surely be engendered
which would eventually 'prompt the people to
break down the barriers and have their own
riotous way "
SENATOR HINMAN, who has been known
as a "Hughes senator," and whose attitude
on the income tax had not previously been re
vealed, came out strongly in favor of it. Dis-f
regarding the advice of Governor Hughes Sen
ator Hinman said: "There is certainly no rea
son why if I have $100,000 and live in New
York and John Smith has $50,000 and lives in
Pennsylvania, I should not pay just twice as
much as Smith does for the protection that is
assured me by -the army, the navy, -police de
partments, fire department, the courts and what
not. Of all the vicious things on the statute
books our system of indirect taxation is the
worst. It breeds extravagance because the peo
ple are paying the bills and don't know it. The
people of this state and nation are for this
proposition, I tell you. They want it and they'll
get it, if not now, eventually, surely," Mr. Wag
ner, democrat, of Manhattan, said: "Unlike
our high republican tariff, this is a tax on plenty
Instead of on necessity. It will lighten the bur
dona of the poor. .In time pt w,ar 49 outoJfC
doctrine of untaxed wealth that tho poorer
classes should both pay our taxes and also im
peril their body and limb is a vicious doctrine
and should have no place in our government."
The fight against the ratification of the amend
ment was led by Mr. Newcomb, who reiterated
the arguments advanced by Govornor Hughes.
Mr. Schultz, democrat, spoke in favor of the
plan, as did Mr. Wainwright, another Hughes
follower. Messrs. Hill and Brough assailed It
bitterly.
NEW YORK Is considerably stirred by tho
victory for the income tax in tho state sen
ate'.. It might be after all that -this great re
form would be ratified by the Empiro state. Tho
Buffalo (N. Y.) Times prints this interesting
editorial: "Notwithstanding tho previous ad
verse action of tho assembly the passing of the
income tax amendment by the state senate is
of a genuine practical importance which tho
adversaries of the amendment will be unable
to minimize. Had it no other value than as a
protest it would still bo well .worth while. But
It has a larger significance than that. It will
have its effect on the prospects of the income
tax measure in states which have not already
put themselves on record. Also, in all fairness
it ought to put up to the assembly, at the
present session, reconsideration of the amend
ment. If the assembly does nothing more, It
will be on account of the dictatorial will of
Speaker Wadsworth, and the grip of the rules
committee. The people want the income tax
amendment put to another vote In tho assembly,
and the issue now becomes ono between the
principles of Cannonlsm, as extended to the
assembly, and fair and free legislation. The
Income tax amendment was lost In the as
sembly by a single vote, that of a recreant dem
ocrat, 'Mannie' Friend, who was won over by
tho republican machine. The income tax reso
lution must now go back to the assembly, and
the indications of this morning point to a strong
fight for. another vote. It is said that at the
present time eighty votes can be- mustered for
th.e amendment in the assembly. But under
the autocratic traditions of the rules commit
tee, a demand of 100 members would be neces
sary to take the question of a re-submiSslon out
of tho rules committee and place It before the
house. But if -the rules committee shall defy
the wish of a decisive majority of tho assembly
to rec6nsider -the amendment, it will offer a
demonstration of the' arrogance of the commit
tee which will not be lost on tho people of the
state. It will be a renewed proof that Can
nonism is a state as well as a national abuse,
that the assembly has its Cannon In Speaker
Wadsworth, nnd that a prime' necessity tb" in
sure representation of the popular will is to
curb the power of the speaker and clip,, the
wings of the assembly rules committee."
THE POPULAR impression with respect to
the Taft administration Is that it has made
"blunder upon blunder." Under that headline
the New York World prints this editorial:
"When Mr. Taft was a judge of the United
States circuit court he allowed no subordinate
of litigation to prepare tentative opinions for
liim. He permitted no lawyer to ante-dato
briefs in order to meet the claims of opposing
counsel. He heard all the arguments himself;
he. read the briefs himself; he decided the case
himself, and the decision was the decision of
Taft, judge. It was nobody else's decision. The
public rightfully assumed that this was tho way
Mr. Taft acted in the Ballinger case too; that
the president sat as a judge; that he carefully
weighed all the evidence both against and for
the secretary of the interior, and that when
he exonerated Mr. Ballinger he was deciding as
an impartial judge, uninfluenced by anything
except the cold, remorseless facts. The country
can no longer believe- that this was Mr. Taft's
attitude. In permitting Attorney General Wick
ersham to tamper with the date of a written
opinion, and. in allowing the assistant attorney
general for the Interior department to prepare
a memorandum to help the president in framing
his decision, Mr. Taft divested himself of his
function as a judge and must now be included
among the attorneys for the defense. Senator
Dolliver in his speech at Des Moines tho -other
day described the president as 'a good man sur
rounded by people who know exactly what ttyey
want.' This is the view the country is begin
ning to take of him, and it is .certain to be
'strengthened" by his conduct in the Ballinger
ions nro his own, arrived at independently by
judicial determination of tho evidence This I
unfortunate from every point of view. If thorp
is to bo a further enlargement of tho president,
cabinot, as many persons havo urged wo should
like to suggest a department of common sense
In chargo of a competoht secretary who could
always be trusted to act as a disinterested ad
vlser to the chief magistrate."
FORTY-TWO candidates for congress wore,
nomlnnt'od In Ohio May 18 for tho twonty-.
one Buckeye seats. Ralph D. Colo, democrat, m
of tho Eighth district, was the only present con
gressman defeated for a renomlnatlon. ' Frank
B. Willis takes his place on the ticket. The,'
campaigns made against Representatives Taylor'
of Columbus, Kennedy of Youngstown, Thomas
of tho Eighteenth district and Kqlfor of Spring
field on the score of their tariff attitude, failed
signally. Following are the republican and .
democratic nominees: First district Repre
sentative Nicholas Longworth, rep.; Dr. Thomas
P. Hart, dom. Second district Representative'
Herman P. Goebell, rop.; Alfred G. Allen, dem.,
Third district George R. Young, rop.; Repre
sentative JameS M. Cox, dom. Fourth district
C. E. .tohnson, rep.; J. H. Goeko, dem. Fifth
district R. D. Roe, rop.; Representative T. F.
Ansberry, dem. Sixth district Jesse Taylor,
rep,; Representative M. .R. Denver, dom. Sev
enth district -"Warren R. Kelfer, rep.; J. D.
Post, dem. Eighth district Frank B. Willis,
rep.; T, C. Mahon, dem. Ninth district J.
Kent Hamilton, rep.; Representative I. R. Sher
wood, dem. Tenth district Representative A.
R. Johnson, rop.; Edmund Willis, dem..
Eleventh district -Representative Albert Doug
las, rep.; H. C. Claypool, dem. Twelfth district
Representative E. L. Taylor, Jr., rep.; Frank
S. Monnetti dem. Thirteenth district .7. D.
McLaughlin, rep.; Representative C. C. Ander
son, dem. Fourteenth district J. G. Chamber1
lain, rep.; Representative W. G. Sharp, dem.;
Fifteenth district Representative James Joyce,
rop.; George White, dem. Sixteenth district
Representative D. A. Hollingsworth, rep.; W; 13.
Francis, dem. Seventeenth district A. B'.v
Critchfleld, rep,; Representative W. A. 'Ash-"
brook, dem. Eighteenth district RepreSenta-'
tlve James Kennedy, rep.; J. J. Whlteacro, denV.'
Nineteenth district Representative W". A.
Thomas, rep.; E. R. Bathrick, dem. Twentieth
district Representative Paul Howland, rep'.,4
William Gordon, dem. Twentyrfirst district-5
Representative' M. IT; Cassidy, rep.; R. J. Bulk-'
ley, dem. - ' ' ?.
every &o.fP pnose cvpjujtesr to make .un case, Tno puauc, wnjnmce lesg an,a tiess reu
our ,gret'ktms:,ar'dvpei:ift!na; whose patriotism atfee' hereafter, Hp'pn.'Jhe presIdentOfcjjttjdgment-Is-aaVeifc
aV itelr 'eMlf xiF?nl2ll. And tAW it will bo less and lesVconfident tnaOiis onln-
THE SIOUX CITY (la.) Journal, a standpat
republican newspaper, prints this editorial:
"It is a mattor of some surprise that the follow
ing from the Springfield (Mass.) Republican,
should have escaped the attention of the lead
ing insurgent newspapers of this state: 'No ono
has deemed it worth while, thus far to point out
that the speeches of Senators Dolliver jind Cum
mins at Des Moines early this week could havo'
been rolled into one and passed off as an address
by Mr. Bryan some years ago, criticising the'
republican party. How very like the Bryan of
almost any year between 1896 and 1908 was
Senator Cummins' assertion that tho present
leaders of the republican party are in leaguo
with the corporations and have 'scant time to
consider the needs and desires of the great mass
of humanity.' When Senator Dolliver used tho
word 'pirate' to describe tho same leaders, ho
reminded ono of IILr. Bryan in his campaigns
against all the arts and tho money of Mark"
Hanna. The republican Insurgents of this typo
ought now to be ready to concede that Mr. Bryan
was accurate in his claim, in 1908, that the
Roosevelt policies would be safer In his care
than in Mr. Taft's.' Harvey Ingham, the pre
siding officer pn the occasion referred to, has
given many proofs of intimacy with the Spring
field Republican and of his i espect for its opin
ions. The Register and Leader, Mr. Ingham's'
osjiior newspaper, has given numerous quota
tions concerning 'the greatest political meeting
ever held in Iowa,' and In the collation of these
quotations the anxious shears have not neglect
ed search 4n the upheaval districts of Massachu
setts and New York. The Springfield Republi
can must have proved disappointing to Its
friends in Des Moines, for it has been dropped
from the Usfc of quotable papers. The Journal
is not displeased to find itself somewhat ap
proved in its independent judgment by so high'
an authority in independent expression as this'
newspaper p Springfield. The. compliment
if . compliment, is . in,volved.-Ttriaf Mr,. Bryant
alone'
n
(I
t. lUAiK. ritLtldJU H<tLl tegBtlmirifllft.J
'-T'Tr
