Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

of the committee to reserve an amendment in that and some of the western States beet sugar can particular if, on further examination, it shall ap-|be profitably cultivated. But, in the bill as it now pear necessary.

No objection was made.

Mr. NELSON. On page 19, I move to amend by inserting, after the word "conclusive," in line four hundred and forty-six, the following:

By inserting after the words "on molasses produced from the sugar-cane" the words " and on maple molasses ;" and by inserting after the words "when removed from the plantation" the words "on maple sirup;" and by inserting after the words " other than those produced by the refiner" the words "and on maple sugar;" and by striking out the words "produced directly from the sugar-cane, and not," in the paragraph relating to refined sugars, and inserting in the place thereof the words "and not produced ;" and also in the second paragraph, relating to refined sugars, by striking out the words "produced directly from the sugar-cane, and not," and inserting in the place thereof the words " and not produced."

I offer this amendment for the purpose of imposing taxation upon an article that seems to have been entirely forgotten, and that is, maple sugar, which is produced to the extent of upward of nine million pounds in the State of Vermont, and throughout the country, according to the census of 1860, to the extent of 38,863,568 pounds. That was the production of maple sugar in the United States at that time. I think it is the only article that entirely escapes from taxation under this bill.

I find further by looking at the census of 1860, that of maple molasses there was produced in the United States, in 1860, 1,944,299 gallons, upon which there is no tax whatever.

Mr. BOUTWELL. Where does the gentleman propose to insert his amendment?

Mr. NELSON. If the gentleman will look at page 51 of the internal revenue act, he will see. Mr. BOUTWELL. In what line of this bill? Mr. NELSON. After the word "conclusive" in line four hundred and forty-six, on page 19. Mr. BOUTWELL. I suggest to the gentleman that his amendment, in order to follow the course of the existing law, should come in on the four hundred and thirty-second line, after the word "ten."

[ocr errors]

Mr. NELSON. I will move, then, to insert it at that point. If the gentleman will look at page 51 of the internal revenue bill, under the marginal note of "molasses," he will see that I propose to impose a duty of five cents a gallon upon maple molasses. After the words "molasses produced from the sugar-cane" I propose to insert "and maple sugar. And then, in the next paragraph, I propose to impose a tax of one cent and a quarter per gallon on sirups made from maple sugar. And in the next paragraph, where the marginal note is "brown sugar," I propose to insert" maple sugar, so that it shall pay a tax of two cents a pound. I propose also to amend the next paragraph by striking out the words "produced directly from the sugar-cane and not," and inserting in lieu thereof "not produced," so that it will include maple sugar when refined. I looked through the bill and found that nowhere in it was this production of nearly thirty-nine million pounds required to pay one cent into the Treasury, or this other production of nearly two million gallons. While everything else in that line is taxed, this article produced in some of the States seems, by an oversight, to have escaped the attention of the committtee entirely.

Mr. MORRILL. I suppose that the gentleman from New York has accomplished his purpose by merely introducing his amendment. He evidently intended to be a little sweet upon me. [A laugh.]

Now, the State of Vermont is not any more interested in this question than many other States. The State of New York produces a much larger quantity of maple sugar than we do in Vermont. The State of New Hampshire produces nearly as much, and a litle more maple molasses; and the same thing is true of Ohio, and of other western and northern States.

There is no desire to relieve New England from any proper taxation. I think we should regard the cultivation of sugar in any direction as an important matter. So far as I am concerned, I never have been in favor of taxing even southern sugar. It is an article of prime necessity to the poor man as well as to the rich. The average consumption of our country is much above thirty pounds for every man, woman, and child.

I think that we ought to encourage its production by all proper means. I am told that in California |

stands, it never was the intention to collect any tax upon sorghum, or upon maple sugar, or upon the beet; and none has been levied. I presume it is not the purpose of this committee to change the policy of Congress in relation to this article. Mr. HOLMAN. I desire to make an inquiry in reference to the produce from sorghum. Do I understand the gentleman to say that it is subject to no tax as a manufacture?"

Mr. MORRILL. It is not, in the opinion of the committee, subject to any tax; but to prevent all doubt on this point, the bill now before the House proposes an amendment distinctly to exempt it. I understand that the Commissioner of Internal Revenue has ruled that it is subject to tax as a manufacture. To exclude, beyond all peradventure, such a construction, the committee recommend an amendment to the present law.

Mr. KASSON. I move, pro forma, to strike out the second clause of the amendment.

I am not certain that I understand fully the amendment proposed by the gentleman from New York, [Mr. NELSON.] If I do it proposes to tax the molasses made from sorghum or imphee. Am I correct?

Mr. NELSON. No, sir; my amendment leaves the present law stand just as it is in that respect. Mr. KASSON. I ask the gentleman to state just what he proposes to tax.

Mr. NELSON. I propose to tax maple sugar and maple molasses.

Mr. KASSON. Then I leave the debate to other gentlemen.

and bought and sold not by small quantities, but by bulk, and whether the producers have not increased the price in proportion to the increased price of everything else.

Mr.STEVENS. Mr. Chairman, I do not know what it cost in 1860, but I dare say that it has gone up with everything else. As to this being made and brought to market, I think that it is not 80. I find that it is considered as a special delicacy, and perhaps the boys in the cars may bring it about and sell it. I think that the House will agree with me that it ought not to be taxed.

Mr. KASSON, by unanimous consent, withdrew his amendment.

Mr. MALLORY. I renew it. Mr. Chairman, I hope that this article will be passed over by the House. It seems to me that thegentleman from New York [Mr. NELSON] is using microscopic powers to find out what ought to be taxed in this bill. Of all the articles produced in the United States I think that this is one which claims exemption from taxation.

I live in a State where a good deal of maple sugar is produced. It is not produced for sale, for it is scarcely ever sold at all; and I doubt whether what is produced in Vermont is for the purpose of being sold, for consumption out of the State, at all events. They transfer it from one to another in that State as they do in Kentucky. It is not raised as an article of sale at all. The women of our country, the little boys and girls, those in ordinary circumstances, from the 1st of February up to the middle of March, pack as they call it, the sugar water upon their heads in buckets from the troughs under the trees to the places where it is evaporated. They do it to eke out a subsistence in my State. It is done by persons in Kentucky-and I have no doubt all over the United States where the maple tree grows

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. Chairman, when the present bill was framed the committee very distinctly decided that they would not tax the product of sorghum, a growing interest which the committee decided it was essential to have culti--by persons who are unable to procure or purvated. Just so with regard to maple sugar, the production of which costs more labor than even the production of sugar or molasses from sorghum. The present law provides as follows:

"On sirup of molasses or sugar-cane juice, when removed from the plantation, concentrated molasses or melado, and cistern bottoms, of sugar produced from the sugarcane and not made from sorghum or imphee, a duty of one cent and one fourth of one cent per pound."

We supposed that that language made it very plain that no duty was to be levied upon the product of sorghum. But the learned head of the Internal Revenue department has decided that, under that provision imphee is subject to taxation, and he has accordingly required tax to be paid. In the amendments which we now propose we hope to make ourselves better understood, and we have declared that sorghum shall be among the things exempted. Nobody ever supposed that maple sugar should be taxed. I wonder, however, that has not been reckoned by the Commissioner among manufactures. We have in this bill taken great pains to exempt the product of sorghum, because it is an important growing interest, which in our view ought to be encouraged instead of being checked.

I have always been for taxing sugar; my colleague on the committee has not. I have been for taxing it while we are, as Jefferson Davis maintains, two nations. When we shall have become, by general agreement one nation, perhaps I shall be for exempting sugar, as we always did before the war. But so long as the southern rebellion continues, I am for taxing the sugar made outside of our lines, whether outside of our nation or not. But, as a substitute, I am in favor of encouraging the manufacture of sorghum and maple sugar and

molasses.

I presume that the gentleman from New York does not know how troublesome it is to make sugar from maple. If he would go out on a cold morning and tap the trees and then carry the sap by a yoke upon his shoulder, a bucket full of sap at each end of it, and then if he would set about boiling this sap, he would come to the conclusion that maple sugar is sufficiently taxed.

chase other sugar. It is made for home consumption. It is a little article, and I hope that it will escape taxation, which seems to be visited upon almost everything. I hope that the amendment of the gentleman from New York will not be adopted.

Mr. COX. I wish simply to call the attention of my friend to the fact that by the present law all articles like maple sugar, made for home consumption and not for sale, are not taxed. There is a general provision in the tax law which excludes all such articles.

Mr. MALLORY. My friend mistakes me. I said that it was made for use in the State, and it is used there in considerable quantities.

Mr. COX. I suppose that the great bulk of maple sugar made in Kentucky is for the consumption of those who make it. Only some three hundred and eighty-one thousand pounds are made in that State.

Mr. MALLORY. I will say that it is used in this way: in Kentucky they take it to the store and exchange it for other articles, such as a little coffee, tea, tobacco, or whatever they may need. Therefore, under the provisions of the bill, it will be taxed.

Mr. COX. I do not want that to be taxed.

Mr. MALLORY. The same may be the case in the gentleman's State, although it may not be so in the part where he resides.

Mr. COX. In the State of Ohio we make three million three hundred and twenty-three thousand four hundred and ninety-two pounds. We have five times the population in the State of Ohio that there is in Vermont; and yet in the State of Vermont there are made some nine million pounds. Now the price is thirty cents a pound, and it used to be only eight cents a pound. I think that the great bulk of maple sugar made in Vermont is for the purpose of merchandise, and not to be used by those who make it. It seems to be a business in the State of the gentleman from the Committee of Ways and Means; and it does look as if the gentleman from Vermont was vigilant indeed as to the interests of his own State. I do not blame him. All I want is that the House may know what are the interests of the various States, and what is the paramount interest of the State of Vermont; and if we are to tax articles made in Ohio in superabundance, such as whisky, why not tax an article of such large manufacture in Vermont? Mr. MALLORY, by unanimous consent, withdrew his amendment.

Mr. NELSON. I desire to ask the gentleman a question. I see by the census of 1860 that New York produced upward of ten million pounds of maple sugar. Will the gentleman tell me what was the price of maple sugar in 1860, and what is its price in the market to-day? I also desire the gentleman to state whether maple sugar is not an Mr. MORRILL. I move to amend by insertarticle in general use, to be found in the markets, || ing after "maple" the words "or sorghum." If

this amendment pass it is obviously just to include all descriptions of sugar.

into the necessary consumption of all classes. He will tell us it is produced easily out of the Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.earth, and with very little labor. So is maple Cox] had not discussed this amendment we certainly should have missed on this subject his usual amount of wit.

Now, in relation to this matter-to treat the subject seriously-in my opinion it is no more just to tax maple sugar as a production than it would be to tax butter, or cheese, or wool. We have in all cases endeavored to avoid taxation upon the products of the farm. It is only upon manufactures, as such, that we have endeavored to levy a tax.

Now, in relation to the point made by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Cox] about large quantities of this article being made, and particularly in Vermont. For a small State there is a large amount made; and our people are industrious. But to say that it is a profitable manufacture, no one who knows anything about the business will pretend. Some seasons are good and some bad, so that profits are always uncertain. It is made at a season of the year when the farmers in the North can do nothing else; when the hills are covered with snow and they cannot engage in cultivating the ground as they can do in the more genial climate of Ohio and Kentucky. With us it is the practice of almost every man, owning land or not, who has a family, to make a small quantity of maple sugar; because otherwise he might be unable to purchase and use it in his family. If he owns no sugar orchard he takes a certain number of trees of some neighbor who has and carries on the business on shares; and if it should be taxed it will be a tax bearing heavily upon the poor man.

But a very small quantity of this article is manufactured for the market. In country towns there may be a few individuals, perhaps, who will go to the expense of purchasing tin buckets, pans, &c., and thus make a superior article; and if they do, they send off a barrel or two to some city where they can obtain an extravagant price for an early-made superior article. As a general thing, even those who make it do not use it in their tea and coffee, but only for certain purposes of cooking, where it is as good and perhaps better than any cane sugars.

As to its being a marketable article, you may go into the various towns of the North, wherever it is made, and you will perhaps find at the village stores that two or three barrels have accumulated in the spring of the year, and which is sold at less price than the foreign article. And that is about the extent of the market. It is sold mostly as a lower-priced article, or, when made early, it is sold, as candy and confectionery are sold, as a luxury.

I think it will not be the purpose of this committee to reverse our whole action in reference to taxing the products of the soil. I think it will be the purpose of the committee to exempt from taxation all the products of the sorghum, the maple, and the beet.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Pennsylvania. I am not generally in favor of taxing every species of article we can lay our hands upon, but I must enter my protest against the discrimination attempted to be made in relieving from taxation an article of so extensive production as maple sugar. I cannot for the life of me see why a similar article, the product of a plant grown and cultivated by labor, should be taxed, while an article of this character, which is merely collected from the forests, and collected in great quantities, too, at great profit, but to the destruction many times of timber not belonging to the parties collecting it, is relieved from taxation.

The gentleman from Vermont tells us it is only used for confectionery purposes. But what of that? When gentlemen get hold of ale and porter, which are used only as beverages, do they not tax them? And ale and porter are produced by great labor, while the production of maple sugar yields largely in profits to those who collect the material. It seems to me the discrimination is very unjust, because in some portions of the country we raise grain, and maple trees do not abound. Gentlemen are anxious to tax every article of product. In this bill it is proposed to tax petroleum six cents per gallon, and when we get to that article the gentleman from Vermont will not tell us it is an article of luxury, because it enters

sugar. Gentlemen may suppose that because they have seen maple sugar used in candy shops, and sold in small quantities in the country, that it is not used to a very large extent. But that is not so, and especially since the price of sugar has become so great and the production of sugar from the cane has been so completely destroyed by the rebellion.

Sir, if I had my way about it, I would release sorghum from taxation and tax maple sugar; I would relieve sugar made from the cane from taxation and tax the other, for the reason that I would encourage the production of those articles at this time.

Mr. MALLORY. If the gentleman wishes to enlarge the scope of taxation, I want to ask him if he is willing to include buckwheat and clover seed, which are produced very extensively, I believe, in Pennsylvania, to an extent greater than elsewhere, and better?

Mr. JOHNSON, of Pennsylvania. Well, I do not know that I am particular about those things. When the gentleman proposes to tax buckwheat, I will tell him. I can tell the gentleman that there is scarcely any buckwheat raised in the country I come from. His remarks about sugar-candy and sugar-plums must have taken his mind back to the time when he was a boy at school, and now he is thinking of buck wheat cakes and slap-jacks. [Laughter.] But it does seem to me that gentlemen are disposed in this matter to discriminate in favor of their particular localities, and as suggested by the gentleman from Ohio, the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. MORRILL] has forgotten that his State produces this article so vastly; and even my venerable colleague [Mr. STEVENS] Seems to remember the State where he sucked his sugar in early life. [Laughter.] Now, I am opposed to discriminating against the productions of labor and in favor of those articles that produce largely and most profitably without labor at all.

The question was taken on Mr. MORRILL'S amendment, and no quorum voted.

Tellers were ordered, and Messrs. MORRILL and HOLMAN were appointed.

The committee divided; and the tellers reported -ayes 47, noes 48.

So the amendment was rejected.

The question recurred on Mr. NELSON's amendment; and being put, the amendment was disagreed to.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE.

The committee at this point rose informally; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, a message from the Senate, by Mr. HICKEY, their Chief Clerk, informed the House that the Senate had passed a bill (No. 407) to authorize the establishment of ocean mail steamship service between the United States and China, in which he was directed to ask the concurrence of the House.

TAX BILL.

The committee then resumed its session. Mr. WHALEY. I move to add, at the end of line four hundred and fifty-three, the following: That section ninety-four of said act shall be further amended by adding after the word "parties," where it occurs in the clause imposing a tax on mineral coals, as follows:

And provided further, That no tax shall be imposed on mineral coal mined and used by manufacturers of salt in such manufacture.

Mr. Chairman, I desire only to state to the committee that the manufacturers of salt now pay a license tax and a tax on barrels as well as a tax on the salt, and that the manufacturers of salt in many places, who use wood for fuel, instead of coal, pay no such tax as this. The manufacturers who use coal are compelled to pay a tax of five cents a ton upon the coal mined by them for the manufacture of salt. It has already put the price of salt in many places so high as to place the article beyond the reach of the poor. I was informed by an hon orable gentleman upon this floor yesterday that salt is thirty-six dollars a barrel in Missouri, and it is impossible for the salt manufacturers who use coal to compete with those who use wood, which is not taxed. Now, salt is a necessary article, and one which the humblest families are compelled to use, and this tax which I propose to repeal really puts salt beyond the reach of the humblest classes in the Northwest.

Mr. MORRILL. All I have to say in relation to this amendment is that it is utterly impossible to discriminate in relation to this matter, even if it were just. I am not certain that it would be just. We now tax the coal by which iron is made, and I do not see why we should not tax that by which salt is made.

The amendment was disagreed to.

Mr. HOOPER. On the part of the Committee of Ways and Means I offer the following amend

ment:

At the end of line four hundred and twenty-one, insert the following:

By inserting after the word "naphtha," in the paragraph relating to coal illuminating oil, the word "distillate;" by inserting after the words "returns, assessments," the words "removing to and withdrawing from the warehouses." The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. KALBFLEISCH. I offer the following amendment:

After the word "party," at the end of fine four hundred and twenty-one, insert the following:

By inserting, in the last proviso in the paragraph on gas, after the words "coal-tar," where they first occur, the words" and ammoniaeal liquor."

The present law provides:

"That coal-tar produced in the manufacture of illuminating gas, and the products of the redistillation of coal-tar thus produced, shall be exempt from duty."

Ammoniacal liquor needs to be exempt as much as coal-tar, in order to encourage and assist those who are now trying to make some new products in the manufacture of illuminating gas.

Mr. MORRILL. This is a matter about which. the gentleman from New York [Mr. KALBFLEISCH] feels some interest. I confess that I am not particularly informed on the subject, but I am inclined to think that the amendment is proper. The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. COX. I move to amend by inserting after the word "that," in line four hundred and thirtyseven, the words "Bibles and books printed exclusively as educational books." I offer this principle adopted by the committee and to remove amendment to carry out what I suppose to be the

a doubtful construction to which I think the clause in its present form is liable. The section now provides that

Arithmetics, spelling-books, geographies, grammars, and primary books of the kinds usually taught in common and primary schools, and all books printed by religious societies exclusively for the use of Sunday-schools, shall be exempt from any duty or tax.

To carry out that principle and place it beyond peradventure, I propose that we shall exempt from taxation Bibles and a educational books, whether used in primary schools, common schools, or academies. My object is to exempt from taxation, as far as possible, that which develops and improves the human mind.

Mr. KASSON. This question was considered by the Committee of Ways and Means, and we found that it would be entirely impracticable, if we used any such general language, to accomplish the object desired by the gentleman from Ohio without accomplishing a great deal more. So far as concerns Bibles, the provision can be made specific, and we have no objection to such a provision. The phrase "educational books" is, however, too broad. There is scarcely any book which in a certain sense may not be construed to be an educational book. Books used in theological schools, law schools, universities, &c., as well as those adapted for the gentleman's library, might be included under this designation. Such is the breadth of the term that it might include a very large portion, perhaps the largest portion, of the books published in this country or abroad.

Mr. COX. I am glad to have the support of the gentleman in favor of the idea which I have attempted mainly to express. I will include the words class books or elementary books," or I will leave it to the construction of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, who has power to construe the section. His idea is to save from taxation all books used for educational purposes. When we use that expression we know what it is. We do not mean books for libraries; we mean only books which are intended for schools, academies, or colleges. I will use the phrase "class books" or any other the gentleman may suggest.

Mr. HALE. I suggest that the gentleman from Ohio insert the words "educational or devotional books.

[ocr errors]

Mr. COX. I have no objection to that, and I

will accept that as a modification of my amend

ment.

Mr. KASSON. Mr. Chairman, I think that any enlargement of the definition it is evident will carry us into difficulty. Take devotional books, for example. There is hardly a religious book, or a book on a religious subject, that would not be included under that denomination. Many of them are elegantly bound, and are sold exclusively for gifts at Christmas and other occasions. While the committee desire, with other gentlemen of the House, to exempt those books which are really necessary as a part of the general education of the country, they do not think it safe to extend it beyond the common schools of the country.

I am willing to accept so much of the gentleman's amendment as refers to Bibles. I agree with him on that. I congratulate him on his desire to facilitate the reading of that Book. I trust that with that exception the amendment will be rejected, as it would lead us into extreme difficulty.

Mr. TOWNSEND. I am glad that the amendment of the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. HALE] has been accepted by the gentleman from Ohio. In regard to what the gentleman on the Committee of Ways and Means says, that the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio would include an extensive number of books, I will reply that these books include but a small proportion of the aggregate number of books that are published. I think that the language of the bill is indefinite. It speaks of grammars, geographies, and spelling-books. We all know that there are various elementary books.

The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman move an amendment?

Mr. TOWNSEND. I was going to move to strike out the last word, but I have said all that I desire to say.

Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I propose to amend by inserting after "grammars" as follows:

Copy-books and school-books of the kinds commonly used in common and primary schools, and all books printed exclusively for the use of Sunday-schools.

I move it as a substitute for the amendment of the gentleman from Chio.

Mr. COX. I do not think that the gentleman from Massachusetts has improved the original amendment. There are a number of books upon astronomy, botany, and kindred subjects, which are not included in the gentleman's amendment. Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. My amendment covers all books used in common and primary schools.

Mr. COX. Does the gentleman's expression of common or primary schools include academies or colleges?

Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I suppose not. Mr. COX. Then suppose you insert academies and colleges.

Mr. KASSON. Will the gentleman let me make a suggestion?

Mr. COX. Certainly.

Mr. KASSON. When the subject was up in committee we understood that the proposition of the gentleman from Ohio would really include from three fourths to four fifths of the trade carried on in the country. We do not think it safe to make so broad an exception.

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I adopt the principle of the committee, and I want it to be carried out, and that is to save education from taxation, whether in the common school, academy, or college. The suggestion of the committee here is to limit, not to exempt, these most valuable publications in respect to academies and colleges. And I think the House ought to come up and sustain that view of it. They exempt other articles of manufacture. They exempted to-day nine million pounds of maple sugar in one State, because it was a home manufacture. Now this thing is far more important in every sense of the word than your maple sugar-to the young mind. [Laughter.] The gentleman from Iowa accepts my amendment as to Bibles. I would like to know why the committee do not report on Bibles.

Mr. KÁSSON. We expected opposition on that point. [Laughter.]

Mr. COX. I want to make Bibles cheap in the State of Iowa, and I want an educational system established throughout the whole land so that the Bible may be appreciated; and if the committee will assist me we will make it so broad and extensive there will be no tax upon education. I

think the great difficulty in this country is a lack of education.

Mr. MALLORY. I move to amend the substitute by inserting "all other books used in all other places." In my anxiety to promote the cause of education I wish to be esteemed more catholic than the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Cox.] I go for sweeping away all obstruction. I am induced to do this almost by the possibility of the difficulty which the executors of the law will find in carrying out the provisions of the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Massachusetts. Who is to decide what books are educational, what would be used in colleges, and

what in academies?

Mr. COX. I will answer the gentleman: the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

Mr. MALLORY. You put into office in every district of the United States a man who has a very limited education, and who, in some instances, knows hardly how to read and write, and set him up as a censor of the books of this country, and empower him to decide what are properly educational books, and what are not. Now, I object to that policy. That is the very point in the case to which I object. What is to prevent the authors and publishers of books, if they understand that such books are to be exempt from taxation, from printing upon the title-page of any work, "This book is intended for the use of schools and academies?" They may do it with histories, with works of poetry, or with any work of literature; and yet the gentleman from Ohio says that these assessors, appointed by the President in the various districts, are to pass upon these books and say whether the author understands the purpose for which he wrote the book, or whether he himself does.

Mr. COX. The gentleman utterly misrepresents my view. My answer to him was that the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and not the assessor, decided; I never argued that these various assessors should decide upon books because the title-page is printed so and so. When a question arises as to what class a book belongs, whether or not educational in the ordinary sense of the term, it is left for decision to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. I stand by the committee.

Now, let me give the committee some facts in regard to this business. In 1863 and a portion of 1864 the leading magazines of the country were circulating to the extent of nearly five hundred thousand copies; but since the adoption of this system of taxation, which makes the publishers of magazines manufacturers, and imposes a tax of five per cent. upon their earnings, the reduction in the number of copies of magazines published for distribution in this country is nearly two hundred thousand. Why? Because the publishers have had to advance the price of the magazines to news dealers and news agents and subscribers, by reason of the advanced price of paper; by reason of the three per cent. tax on paper, and the tax on stereotypes and engravings; by reason of the income tax; and last and worst of all these taxes, by classifying them as manufacturers and taxing them as such.

One leading magazine in this country has had its subscription list cut down thirty-five thousand since the 1st day of January; and if this system of taxation goes on against the publishers of magazines and against American authors, it will not be long before we shall have no magazines worthy of being read by an American public. The tax of five per cent. upon the gross receipts of the publishers of magazines in this country did not amount in 1863 to more than sixty-five thousand dollars; yet the infliction of that tax, in addition to other taxes, has run the business down until many of the magazines are now struggling for existence; and I feel that it is unjust to thus burden a business which has done so much in promoting the best interests of the country. I am proud of American authors, and I wish to do all that I can, and to have this House do all that it can, to maintain the superiority of American genius, and of American contributors to American literature.

There is one class of contributors to our magazines which every man in Congress should be proud of, and those are our American wonen. Some of the most elegant, cultivated, and refined women of the country, who are not blessed with wealth, but who are blessed with that which is better than wealth, genius, have contributed to our magazines until they have placed them side by side with the best productions of England. Let us maintain that position, and recognize in these American women the matrons of our American literature, and in our American authors of both sexes a class of authors possessing genius, intelligence, and cultivation, whose productions are calculated to elevate and refine the American people. I would like to see those magazines and those books which are the productions of American authors free from taxation, and to place our American authors, male and female, upon the

Mr. MALLORY. I am not responsible for what the committee does. I am moving my amendment to the substitute of the gentleman from Massachusetts. The learned gentleman at the head of the Committee of Ways and Means stands responsible for the action of the committee, and I have no doubt the chairman will support the proposition of my friend from Ohio if he finds that the very learned and able man at the head of the Revenue Bureau is to decide in all cases, as censor of the press, what books are adapted for literary purposes, what for educa-highest pinnacle of literary fame to which their tional purposes, and what the character of every book is.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. MALLORY. Let me put in what I have indicated, and that will strike it all out. I insist upon my amendment.

The CHAIRMAN. Will the gentleman again indicate what his amendment is?

Mr. MALLORY. I want to include all other books used in all other places. I do not want to include books used in certain cases and not include others.

Mr. INGERSOLL. Is an amendment to the original amendment in order?

The CHAIRMAN. It is.

Mr. INGERSOLL. I move then to amend the original amendment by inserting after the word "books" the words "and all other printed books and magazines, the production of American authors." I desire to call the especial attention of this committee and of the Committee of Ways and Means to one branch of the publishing business in the United States, and that is the publication of magazines. And I desire this Committee of the Whole to determine whether the Government, by this system of taxation, receives sufficient revenue to compensate for the burdens imposed upon publishers and the evils inflicted on authors.

Mr. MALLORY. It does not.

genius entitles them. The permanency of our republican form of Government depends mainly upon the intelligence of the people. To be intelligent, they must be educated; and the best and cheapest way to educate them is to encourage the printing of books and magazines, and removing all obstacles in the way of a general circulation. In my opinion, had the great mass of the southern people possessed the same amount of intelligence, and their education been equal to the northern people, this rebellion would never have been inaugurated, and our common country would have been spared the ravages and desolations of war. [Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. PRUYN. Is debate exhausted?

The CHAIRMAN. It is not, if the gentleman wishes to oppose the amendment.

Mr. PRUYN. No, sir; I am in favor of the amendment of the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. INGERSOLL. I hope every other gentleman is.

Mr. KASSON. Before the vote is taken, I want to understand distinctly from the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. INGERSOLL] if this is, in point of fact, a proposition to levy no tax on any kind of books whatever produced in this country?

Mr. INGERSOLL. Yes, sir; so far as American authors are concerned.

Mr. KASSON. Well, sir, I want that the vote shall be given understandingly on this subject. Mr. INGERSOLL. So do I.

Mr. KASSON. There are books selling as Mr. INGERSOLL. I say it does not. Well high as from ten to forty dollars apiece, cultivat said by the gentleman from Kentucky.

ing the luxurious habits of the country, appeal

ing to the luxury of the country, and as capable of taxation as the article of tobacco or whisky. For my part, I am disposed to favor legitimately American literature, although I have not been inspired from the same admirable source as the gentleman from Illinois. [Laughter.]

Mr. INGERSOLL. I regret that you have not been.

Mr. KASSON. Still, I am bound to object to this proposition from the fact that it is altogether too sweeping, and would exempt a great deal of the wealth and luxury of the country from its legitimate share of taxation. I trust that the subject will be passed over now, and considered at some other portion of the bill.

Mr. COX. Before the gentleman from Iowa is through, I desire to ask him a question.

The CHAIRMAN. Debate on the subject is utterly exhausted.

Mr. MALLORY. I should think so.

Mr. PRUYN. I trust the gentleman from Illinois will strike out of his amendment the words "printed books," and let it apply to magazines alone.

Mr. INGERSOLL. Oh, no.

The question was taken on Mr. INGERSOLL'S amendment, and it was rejected.

Mr. GARFIELD. I move to amend the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio by inserting "Bibles, Testaments, or volumes consisting only of parts of either." What calls my attention particularly to this is the fact that there is a society in the city of New York which for the last seven or eight years has been carrying on the work of translating the books of the Old and New Testaments, and publishing a volume at a time, till there are now some forty or fifty publications, some consisting of one book of the Old Testament, some of two or more books, and some of the whole of the New Testament.

Mr. COX. I have no objection to that. I accept the modification.

Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman, I do not see any reason why we should distinguish between any particular class of publications. There are books, not printed by Sunday-school or Bible societies, that are full of religious sentiments and religious ideas. I hold that this tax on literature is unworthy of the age. If honorable gentlemen would direct their attention to the appropriation bills that are passed without discussion they would find that it costs us three times more every year to take the parallax of Mars, to triangulate the Pleiades, and calculate the stars for 1880, than the amount of the revenue which we get from this tax on books. I hope that this whole tax on knowledge will be struck out. We are unwilling to impose the tax on maple sugar, a luxury which everybody can do without, on sorghum or molasses, which everybody can do without; and yet we propose to hold on to a tax on books, a tax on intelligence, and to throw ourselves in the face and eyes of all the literature of the country. I have not the courage to face the denunciation which, in my judgment, will come down on us from all the writers, all the litterateurs, if, after all this, we persist in the enforcement of this tax.

I repeat, Mr. Chairman, that the distinction taken between religious and other books is not a proper distinction. The exemption of the publications of certain religious societies is not a reasonable exemption. There are books just as religious, and doing as much or more good, that are printed by ordinary publishing houses, and that are not proposed to be exempted. I hope that the committee will not insist upon this tax which it is the policy of the people of all countries-of Germany, of England, and France-to do away with as much as possible. I hope we will strike out of the bill this tax on books and magazines, and impose it on other articles on which the people are more willing to pay it.

The CHAIRMAN. The question now is on the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. MALLORY] to the substitute proposed by the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. RICE.]

Mr. COX. Is debate exhausted on that?
The CHAIRMAN. It is.

The question was taken, and Mr. MALLORY'S amendment was rejected.

Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. Is it in order for me to withdraw my amendment?

The CHAIRMAN. It is.

Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I withdraw it. Mr. ARNOLD. I move to amend the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio by striking out the words "arithmetics, spelling-books, geographies, grammars, and primary books of the kinds usually taught in common and primary schools, and all books printed by religious societies exclusively for the use of Sunday-schools," and inserting in lieu thereof the words "books and magazines," so that it will read:

Provided, That books and magazines shall be exempt from any duty or tax, &c.

Mr. COX. Is that amendment in order? The CHAIRMAN. It is not, unless offered in the nature of a substitute.

Mr. ARNOLD. I offer it as a substitute for the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio. I am in favor of the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio, if I cannot procure the adoption of this substitute. My proposition is to repeal all taxes upon books and magazines, not only Bibles and school books, but all others. We get very little revenue from that source. I understand that the amount

of the tax derived from books and magazines is less than fifty thousand dollars. I submit that the entire tax upon books and magazines should be repealed, and that they should be entirely free. That is what I propose by my amendment. Mr. COX.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

Mr. SPALDING moved to add "and all materials used in the manufacture of printing paper.' The amendment was disagreed to.

Mr. ROSS. I move to add, "and all Democratic papers." [Laughter.]

Mr. COX. I have no objection to have the Democratic party connected with the Bible at any

The amendment was disagreed to.

Mr. COX. My amendment as it has been modified is as follows:

time. I am opposed to the substitute of the gentleman from Illinois, as I was to the amendment of the gentleman from Kentucky. The effect of both is to break down the amendment which I offer. I propose to exempt from taxation these necessaries in education, while the gentleman proposes to exempt what I consider the luxuries of literature, for which we ought to pay. That is the distinction which I make. I hope that the House will vote down all these other propositions, and will adopt my amendment.

Mr. BROWN, of Wisconsin. In order to say a few words on this subject, I move, pro forma, to amend the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio by striking out the last word.

1 favor the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois. I believe that in a country where the basis of our Government is the intelligence of the people we ought not to tax knowledge. The various States are encouraging the formation of libraries in each school district; our people in various localities are uniting for the purpose of forming circulating libraries." We are taxing the people of the United States to-day for the publication of congressional documents, together with Patent Office reports, agricultural reports, &c. Our only justification for appropriating the public moneys in this way is that we thus promote the dissemination of knowledge. Yet, while with the one hand we take money from the public Treasury for the purpose of printing and circulating these books, we with the other are taxing, and thus repressing, private enterprise in the same direction. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that no species of knowledge should be taxed. Our object should be to encourage by our legislation everything that conduces to the intelligence of the people.

I hope that the substitute proposed by the gentleman from Illinois will be adopted. I withdraw my amendment.

Mr. MORRILL. For the purpose of terminating debate on this paragraph, I'move that the committee rise.

The motion was agreed to.

So the committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. POMEROY reported that the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, having had under consideration as a special order the tax bill, had come to no resolution thereon.

Mr. MORRILL. I move that when the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union resumes the consideration of the tax bill, all debate upon the paragraph under consideration be terminated in one half minute.

The motion was agreed to.

Mr. MORRILL. I move that the House again resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union to resume the consideration of the tax bill.

The motion was agreed to; and the House accordingly resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, (Mr. PoмEROY in the chair,) and resumed the consideration of the special order, the tax bill.

In line four hundred and thirty-seven, after the word "that," insert, "Bibles and Testaments, or volumes consisting only of parts of either; prayer-books, hymn-books, and psalm-books, and other books printed exclusively as educational books,"

Mr. HOLMAN. I move to add the words, "the price of which may not be more than two dollars per volume."

Mr. ANCONA. Put it a little higher. Mr. HOLMAN. I will say three dollars per volume, then.

The amendment was disagreed to.

Mr. MORRILL. I move to strike out the words," and other books printed exclusively as

educational books."

The committee divided, and there were-ayes 44, noes 13; no quorum voting.

The CHAIRMAN ordered tellers, and appointed Messrs. HOOPER and Cox.

The committee again divided, and the tellers reported-ayes 61, noes 31.

So the amendment was agreed to.

The question then recurred on Mr. Cox's amendment as amended, and it was disagreed to.

Mr. MORRILL. I move the following amend

ment:

Strike out the words," and in any case of doubt or dispute as to what shall be exempt from duty under this act, the decision of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, approved by the Secretary of the Treasury, shall be final and conclusive."

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. KASSON. I ask that that part of the paragraph which reads, "by striking from the paragraph relating to photographs the words being copies of engravings or works of art, or,'" shall be reserved for the consideration of the Committee of Ways and Means. The language is thought to be too broad.

There was no objection, and it was agreed to accordingly.

Mr. A. MYERS. I move the following:

On coal illuminating oil, refined, and naphtha, benzine, and benzole produced by the distillation of coal, asphal tum, shale, peat, petroleum, or rock-oil, and all other bituminous substances used for like purposes, a duty of ten cents per gallon: Provided, That such oil, refined and produced by the distillation of coal, asphaltum, or shale, exclusively, shall be subject to pay a duty of five cents per gallon, anything to the contrary notwithstanding: And provided further, That distillers of coal-oil or naphtha, benzine, or benzole, shall be subject to all the provisions of law applicable to distillers of spirits, with regard to licenses, bonds, returns, assessments, liens, penalties, drawbacks, and all other provisions designed for the purpose of ascertaining the quantity distilled, and securing the payment of duties, so far as the same may, in the judgment of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and under regulations prescribed by him, be deemed necessary for that purpose: And provided also, That naphtha of specific gravity exceeding eighty degrees, according to Baume's hydrometer, and of the kind usually known as gasoline, shall be subject to a tax of five per cent. ad valorem.

Mr. MORRILL. I make the point of order that the amendment is not germane.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair overrules the point of order.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. KASSON. Mr. THAYER.

That has been done.

It was voted down. Mr. MORRILL. I ask the gentleman to modify his amendment so as to read “ Bibles or Testaments, or parts of either."

Mr. THAYER. I cannot accept that.

Mr. COX. I move to insert after " primary schools" the words "academies and colleges. The CHAIRMAN. The amendment is not in order.

Mr. THAYER. I modify my amendment so as to insert after "Bibles" the word "Testaments."

Mr. GARFIELD. I move to amend the amendment of the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. THAYER] by inserting after the word "Testaments" the words "or volumes consisting of only parts thereof."

The question being put, and no quorum votingThe CHAIRMAN ordered tellers; and appointed Messrs. GARFIELD, and STEELE of New Jersey.

The committee divided; and the tellers reported -ayes sixty-seven, noes not counted.

So the amendment to the amendment was agreed to.

The question recurring upon the amendment as amended, and no quorum voting

Mr. HOLMAN demanded tellers.

Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. THAYER and HOLMAN were appointed.

The committee divided; and the tellers reported -ayes 60, noes 22; no quorum voting.

Mr. HOLMAN. Rather than break up the committee, I withdraw the demand for a division. So the amendment as amended was agreed to. Mr. MORRILL. I move to amend by striking out of line four hundred and thirty-nine the words "usually taught" and inserting in lieu thereof the word "used;" so that the clause shall read, "and primary books of the kinds used in common and primary schools."

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. MORRILL. I move to amend the same clause by striking out the word "primary" where it first occurs and inserting in lieu thereof the word "school.

[ocr errors]

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. GARFIELD. I move to amend by inserting after the sentence "shall be exempt from any duty or tax, anything to the contrary notwithstanding," the following proviso:

Provided further, That this exemption shall not apply to any volume which is valued at more than two dollars. The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. COX. I now move to amend by inserting in line four hundred and thirty-nine, after the words "in common and primary schools," the words "academies and colleges.

59

The amendment was not agreed to.

Mr. TOWNSEND. In order to carry out the amendment of the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. MORRILL] in the last sentence amended on his motion by striking out the word "primary" before "books," I move to amend by striking out the words "and primary" before "schools;" so as to make the sentence read, "and school books used in common schools."

The amendment was not agreed to. Mr. MORRILL. Line four hundred and fiftyfour is as follows:

On wrought iron, railroad chairs, and railroad and boat spikes, five dollars per ton.

I move to amend the same by striking out the words "wrought iron" and inserting after the word "spikes" the words "made of wrought iron," and by striking out the comma after the word "chairs."

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. MORRILL. I move to amend on page 22 by inserting after line five hundred and thir

teen the words:

By striking out, in the paragraph relating to diamonds,

precious stones, and imitations thereof, and all other jewelry the word “ten," and inserting in lieu thereof the word "five."

The clause of the tax bill thus proposed to be amended is as follows:

On all diamonds, emeralds, precious stones, and imitations thereof, and all other jewelry, a duty of ten per cent. ad valorem, &c.

Mr. HOLMAN. I suppose the effect of that will be to reduce the amount of duties.

Mr. MORRILL. Nominally; but, in the opinion of the Committee of Ways and Means, it will actually increase the duties.

Mr. HOLMAN. It is an actual reduction of one half.

Mr. MORRILL. From the manner in which the law is now administered, there is a diversity of opinion as to what the tax really applies to, and there is as much fraud as in the manufacture of cigars.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. MORRILL, Lines five hundred and fourteen to five hundred and seventeen, inclusive, read as follows:

By striking out of said section the several paragraphs from the words "on cavendish, plug, twist," down to the words "exclusive of the tax," inclusive, and inserting in lieu thereof the following.

That relates to several sections of the original bill relating to the tax on tobacco, cigars, &c. In order that it may include a further portion of the bill, I move to amend the clause by striking out the words "down to the words 'exclusive of the tax,'inclusive," and inserting in lieu thereof the words "down to and including the words 'and the other to the United States."" The first amendment did not include as much of the bill as was intended to be stricken out.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. A. W. CLARK. In the bill to which these amendments are being made there is the following clause:

On steam engines, Including locomotive and marine engines, a duty of three per cent. ad valorem.

This bill, in lines four hundred and sixty-one and four hundred and sixty-two, proposes to amend that by inserting after the words "steam engines" the words "exclusive of the boiler, in case a duty has been paid thereon." I move to amend that so that the clause in the tax bill shall read as follows:

On steam engines, including locomotive and marine engines, with their boilers, a duty of three per cent. ad valorem.

Mr. Chairman, under the present law steam engines are charged three per cent., but their boilers, not being included, are charged five per cent. I understand that the Committee of Ways and Means are willing to accept this amendment, which allows the whole to go at three per cent. I understood the committee to concur with me that this amendment ought to be made.

Mr. MORRILL. I am not sure about that. The subject has not been acted on by the Committee of Ways and Means, and I think that this amendment changes the law so as to reduce the tax. There is no objection to relieving the article from a double tax, but the object of this bill is mainly to increase the revenue.

Mr. A. W.CLARK. I think that if the House will give me one moment's attention not a single member will vote against my amendment. The present law provides that steam engines, including locomotives and marine engines, shall pay a duty of three per cent. ad valorem. Nothing is said there about boilers. The manufacturer of a locomotive, including, of course, a boiler, has to take it apart to ascertain the weight of the boiler, that it may be taxed separately, being included among "other manufactures." The Committee of Ways and Means tell me that they considered the boiler an essential part of the locomotive, and had no idea that the law would be so construed as to impose a separate tax upon it; but the Commissioner of Internal Revenue has seen fit to make that construction, and now the manufacturers ask that the boiler and locomotive shall be put upon a par, and that a higher tax shall not be demanded on the boiler than is imposed on the engine, which is a much more highly finished article than the

boiler.

Mr. GANSON. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue has published a decision the result of which is to impose a double tax upon boilers. That is unjust and ought to be remedied, and I

have no doubt that the Committee of Ways and Means will concur in the amendment on examination.

Mr. MALLORY. I suggest to the gentleman from New York [Mr. A. W. CLARK] that he should raise the tax on engines to five per cent.

Mr. A. W. CLARK. My object is to have the tax on engines and boilers equal.

Mr. MÄLLORY. Well, do it in that way; increase the tax on engines.

Mr. MORRILL. The bill as proposed by the Committee of Ways and Means will avoid the very double tax of which the gentleman from New York [Mr. GANSON] complains. We do not propose to levy a tax upon a boiler that has been once taxed. It has been done heretofore, under a construction given to the law by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

Mr. A. W. CLARK. I cannot see that the amendment proposed by the Committee of Ways and Means at all obviates the difficulty. Under the construction of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue of the present law, the manufacturer is put to great trouble and expense, after his machinery is completed, to ascertain the exact value of the boiler. He has to take the whole thing to pieces and weigh it, and then he has to pay five per cent. on the boilers while he only pays three per cent. on the engine.

Mr. STEVENS. My only objection to this amendment is that the tax ought to be five per cent. instead of three. We are raising duties

now.

Mr. A. W. CLARK. If the Committee of Ways and Means propose an increase, I am willing that the boilers shall pay the same amount as the locomotive.

Mr. STEVENS. Your amendment reduces it to three per cent.

Mr. A. W. CLARK. It reduces it to the same amount that is paid on engines.

Mr. HOOPER. I would suggest to the gentleman from New York that he change his amendment so as to move to insert after" steam engines" the words "and steam boilers." I think that will reach his object.

Mr. A. W. CLARK. I accept that as a modification of my amendment. The main difficulty is that boilers are not now inserted among the articles manufactured, but are included by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue among other manufactured articles and taxed five per cent. What we propose is that the boiler shall pay the same duty as the locomotive does.

Mr. HOOPER. The amendment which I propose is to strike out the words "exclusive of the boiler, in case a duty has been paid thereon," and insert in lieu thereof the words "steam boilers.' Mr. A. W. CLARK. I accept the amend

ment.

[ocr errors]

Mr. STEVENS. Then I move to amend by making the duty of three per cent. five per cent.

Mr. A. W. CLARK. I ask the gentleman. from Pennsylvania if that increases the duty on steam engines.

Mr. STEVENS. On all manufactures.

Mr. A. W. CLARK. I have no objection to that. My object was that boilers and steam engines should pay the same duty.

Mr. STEVENS. The object was right. The construction of the Commissioner was not such as the Committee of Ways and Means supposed it would be.

Mr. KASSON. Mr. Chairman, with the approval of my colleagues of the Committee of Ways and Means, I suggest that the few lines relating to iron and to steam engines be passed over until to-morrow, that the Committee of Ways and Means may adjust the matter.

There being no objection, the paragraph was passed over informally.

Mr. SPALDING. I move that the committee do now rise.

The motion was agreed to.

So the committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. POMEROY reported that the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union had had under consideration, as a special order, the tax bill, and had come to no conclusion thereon.

MAIL SERVICE TO CHINA.

Mr. COLE, of California. I ask unanimous consent to have taken from the Speaker's table,

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »