Debates in the Senate on the Sixteenth Amendment, 1909

July 3, 1909

TAX ON INCOMES.7 min read
1: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 1 (Senate1909.Jul3.1)

Mr. BROWN. 1\Ir. President , I ask unanimous consent that the joint resolution (S. J. R. 40) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States be laid before the Senate, and that a vote be had thereon immediately.

2: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 2 (Senate1909.Jul3.2)

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the request l\Ir. BROWN. of the Senator from Nebraska?

3: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 3 (Senate1909.Jul3.3)

Mr. BURROWS. 1\Ir. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

4: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 4 (Senate1909.Jul3.4)

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Secretary will call the roll. The Secretary called the roll, and the following Senators answered to their names: · Aldrich Clark, Wyo. Frazier McLaurin Bacon Culb e rson Frye Martin Borah Cummins Gallinger Nixon ~~f:g~egee ~~~l~s Gamble ~!N~ose Bristow Depew Guggenheim Perkins ~~~~t Dick Hughes Scott Burrows m~~~gbam ~g~~i~n,NAl~~k. ~~~~t Burton Dolliver Jones Sutherland Chamberlain ~}~~~er Follette ~~fi~~~r Clapp Flint Mccumber Wetmore

5: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 5 (Senate1909.Jul3.5)

Mr. JONES. My colleague [Mr. PILES] has been called out of the city on important business.

6: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 6 (Senate1909.Jul3.6)

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Fifty-two Senators have - answered to the roll call. A quorum of the Senate is present. Is there objection to the request of the Senator from Nebraska?

7: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 7 (Senate1909.Jul3.7)

Mr. ALDRICH. What is the request?

8: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 8 (Senate1909.Jul3.8)

The VICE-PRESIDENT. That the Senate now vote upon the joint resolution (S. J. R. 40) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

9: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 9 (Senate1909.Jul3.9)

l'lfr. ALDRICH. I have no objection, with the understanding that there is to be no discussion, or the discussion must be limited. Of course that must be understood.

10: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 10 (Senate1909.Jul3.10)

l\fr. McLAURIN, I could not understand the Senator.

11: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 11 (Senate1909.Jul3.11)

l'l!r. ALDRICH. If there is to be any debate, there must be a time fixed for taking the vote.

12: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 12 (Senate1909.Jul3.12)

.Mr. McLAURIN. I do not know about that.

13: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 13 (Senate1909.Jul3.13)

Mr. ALDRICH. It is impossible, the Senator will see, to lay aside the tariff bill indefinitely for the purpose of discussing the joint resolution.

14: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 14 (Senate1909.Jul3.14)

Mr. McLAURIN. That is true. I do not think it ought to be done. I do not think the tariff bill ought to be laid aside for the discussion or the consideration of this proposed amendment. I think it had better come in after the conclusion of the consideration of the tariff bill.

15: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 15 (Senate1909.Jul3.15)

Mr. BROWN. r hope Senators will not object. It seems to me that the joint resolution ought to be passed now, in order that the House may have it before the tariff bill reaches that body.

16: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 16 (Senate1909.Jul3.16)

In view of the objections that appear to be apparent, r change the request and ask that the joint resolution be laid before the Senate and that it be voted upon by a roll call at 1 o'clock t 0 JTTI · I th b. t· t th t Th e VI I OE - PRESIDEN 1 J:u .. . s ere o Jee ion o of the Senator from Nebraska?

17: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 17 (Senate1909.Jul3.17)

Mr. BORAH. I could not understand the request.

18: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 18 (Senate1909.Jul3.18)

The VICE-PRESipENT. It is that Senate joint resolution Mr. BORAH. . No. 1:0 be now considered by the Senate, and that it be voted upon by a roll call at 1 o'clock to-day. Is there objection to the request?

19: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 19 (Senate1909.Jul3.19)

l\Ir. McLAURIN. l'lfr. President, I do not believe that there Mr. BORAH. ~s any necessity for any constitutional · amendment to author- and then? ize the Congress of the United States to enact an income · tax. , Whatever may be the intention in bringing forward the proposed amendment, I think the effect will be to defer the enactment of any law providing for an income tax. I think the effect of it will be that there will be probably more than a fourth of the States of the Union which will refuse to ratify the action of Congress when this proposed amendment to the Constitution is presented to the States for ratification, and then I think that will be presented to the Supreme Court of the United States as an argument why an income tax should be held to be unconstitutional. I think it would be urged as a very plausible argument before the Supreme Court of the United States that the people are not in favor of an income tax and do not believe that an income tax would be constitutional.

20: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 20 (Senate1909.Jul3.20)

I can not conceive that there can be any necessity for any constitutional amendment. If I understood the vote yesterday, the proponent of this proposed constitutional amendment voted against the income tax. ·

21: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 21 (Senate1909.Jul3.21)

1\fr. BROWN. I voted for an income tax.

22: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 22 (Senate1909.Jul3.22)

1\fr. McLAURIN. I did not catch the vote of the Senator aright if . he voted for an income tax. The Senator from Nebraska, as I heard it, voted to substitute t he corporation tax for the income tax. I did. A corporation tax is a tax on incomes, which the court has sustained. I voted for that which the court sustained and rejected that which the court rejected.

23: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 23 (Senate1909.Jul3.23)

l\ir. McLAURIN. I do not see that the Congress of the United States should be called upon to zigzag around the inconsistent rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States. Without intending any reflection upon that tribunal, it is composed of men just exactly as the Congress of the United States is composed of men. I believe there · are just as good lawyers in the House of Representatives and in the Senate of the United States as there are on the Supreme Bench.

24: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 24 (Senate1909.Jul3.24)

Mr. BROWN. That is true; but they are not on the bench. Mr. McLAURIN. I can not see that an income tax that would tax a portion of the incomes of the United States is constitutional when an income tax that would be uniform and tax all incomes of the United States over a certain amount would be unconstitutional.

25: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 25 (Senate1909.Jul3.25)

I know that the Members of the Senate and the Members of the House are not on the Supreme Bench, but that does not necessitate nor argue for the abnegation of the right of the Senators and Representatives in Congress to pass their judgment upon a constitutional question. It is for us to pass that which we consider to be a constitutional law, and it is for the Supreme Court to undo it or not, as it sees proper.

26: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 26 (Senate1909.Jul3.26)

Mr. CARTER. l\fr. President-- l\Ir. McLAURIN. I desire to look into this. I do not say that I shall vote against this proposed amendment, but I shall offer to amend the constitutional amendment by striking out the words "or other direct" in one place, and by striking out the words " and direct taxes " in another. The Constitution will then confer all the power which is provided for in the joint resolution and also free Congress from a great many other embarrassments .

2 connections
27: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 27 (Senate1909.Jul3.27)

I yield to the Senator from Montana.

28: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 28 (Senate1909.Jul3.28)

Mr. CARTER. Do I understand the Senator as objecting to fixing the hour of 1 o'clock to-day for voting upon the joint resolution?

29: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 29 (Senate1909.Jul3.29)

Mr. McLA.URIN. I should like to have a little further time than that to consider it.

30: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 30 (Senate1909.Jul3.30)

l\Ir. CARTER. I suggest to the Senator from Nebraska that it is quite possible a number of Senators are absent this Saturday afternoon who would be glad to be apprised of the time that the vote is to be taken on the joint resolution. I therefore suggest to the Senator from Nebraska that he modify his request for unanimous consent by fixing 1 o'clock on Monday.

31: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 31 (Senate1909.Jul3.31)

l\Ir. McLAURIN. I do not object to that.

32: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 32 (Senate1909.Jul3.32)

l\Ir. BROWN. · I accept the modification and ask that a vote be taken without further debate at 1 o'clock on Mond a y.

33: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 33 (Senate1909.Jul3.33)

Mr. McLAURIN. .I wish to offer an amendment to the joint resolution and have it acted upon.

34: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 34 (Senate1909.Jul3.34)

Mr. CARTER. The amendment may be offered and then e reques pending. I Mr. ALDRICH. The vote to be taken at that time without further debate.

36: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 36 (Senate1909.Jul3.36)

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The request now is that the vote be taken at 1 o'clock on Monday upon the joint resolution and all amendments thereto, without further discussion. Without any further discussion between now

38: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 38 (Senate1909.Jul3.38)

Mr. CARTER. It ~ill be open for discussion at any time.

39: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 39 (Senate1909.Jul3.39)

Mr. McLAURIN. It will be <>Pen for discussion between now and Monday at · 1 o'clock.

41: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 41 (Senate1909.Jul3.41)

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair understands that it will be laid before the Senate and discussed until 1 o'clock.

42: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 42 (Senate1909.Jul3.42)

Mr. CARTER. It can be called up by any Senator between now and Monday at 1 o'clock.

43: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 43 (Senate1909.Jul3.43)

Mr . .ALDRICH. I do not understand that necessarily the joint resolution is before the Senate now.

44: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 44 (Senate1909.Jul3.44)

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair thought that that was a part of the request of the S-enator from Nebraska.

45: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 45 (Senate1909.Jul3.45)

l\Ir. BROW -:-. I understand that debate may he had on this or any other subject until 1 o'clock Monday, but at 1 o'clock on Monday the joint resolution is to be laid before the Senate ancl voted on. That is my request.

46: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 46 (Senate1909.Jul3.46)

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the request?

47: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 47 (Senate1909.Jul3.47)

Mr. BRISTOW. The other day we got mixed up, or at least I did, I do not know whether anyone else did, in regard to a unanimous consent, ., ent, and we could not do anything until the income-tax amendments were di posed of. Does this mean nothing else but that the joint resolution is to be considered at 1 o ' clock on Monday? ·1

48: Senate, July 3, 1909, ¶ 48 (Senate1909.Jul3.48)

The VICE-PRESIDENT. It does not. It is expressly stated that that is not the intention, but that the vote shall be taken at 1 o'clock on Monday. Is there objection? The Chair hears no objection, and that is the order of the Senate.

Connections graph

Enter all results↑ ↓ then Enter to open oneTry “Federalist 51”, “Article I, Section 8”, “Amendment 14”

Where you've been

    The places you have read, newest first, kept in this browser only. Nothing is sent anywhere.