Remember good ol’ J. Bracken Lee? Governor of Utah in the 1950s? Decided to
stop paying his federal income tax because he thought the Feds were
unconstitutionally spending good American taxpayer dollars on foreign projects
of various sorts?
Salt Lake City (AP) — The post card from Monroe, La. to Gov. J. Bracken Lee reads:
“Two, four, six, hut—
“We want a tax cut—
“Seven, eight, nine, ten—
“We want to know when—
“We don’t want no hem or haw—
“We’re for the governor of Utah.”
The Louisiana doggerel was among more than 500 letters and cards piled across
the desk today of Harold W. Simpson, Lee’s administrative assistant. Lee is a
Republican.
Simpson said all but four letters praised Lee’s statement he will not pay all
his income tax , hoping to prod the
government into a suit in which he can challenge the constitutionality of
using income tax funds for foreign aid.
“These letters would surprise a lot of politicians,” said Simpson. “Judging
from them, I believe a nationwide referendum would go against continuing
foreign aid.”
Utah Democrats have blasted Lee’s proposal. They asked the governor to either
retract or resign. Lee refused to do either. State Republicans have said “No
comment.”
Challenged Two
Lee’s assistant said 90 per cent of the letters came from outside Utah. Of
the four opposing Lee’s stand, Simpson challenged two. He said they appeared
to come from the same typewriter, although different names were typed a[t]
the bottom. Both were postmarked Los Angeles.
One congratulatory message came from Vivien Kellems, a Stonington,
Conn., manufacturer who
in stopped withholding income taxes from
employes of her cable grip firm. She contended the government couldn’t make
her serve as an unpaid tax collector. The government seized $7,819 in
penalties from her firm’s bank accounts, but Miss Kellems and her brother
David sued and got most of that amount back.
Other letters offered to help. Several included small amounts of money to
help finance Lee’s battle.
Lee declared last week he would withhold his income tax on a portion of his
salary. “I shall put my tax in the bank here in Salt Lake City,” he said.
“Not a dollar of it will they get until legality of this case is tested in
the United States Supreme Court.”
Samples from other letters:
Boulder, Colo. — “Good for
you — both for having the courage to stand up to this tax-despotic government
of ours and its paid press, and for BEING RIGHT.”
Santa Ana, Calif. — “When
a man of your stature comes out as you have on such a vital issue it
rekindles the hopes of the American people that all is not lost and that
there is still a chance.”
Houston — “I doubt if you can muster much support — the people are just too
ignorant of what is going on to be impressed, but I urge you to carry on.”
“We began with a Mud March; I wonder whether we shall end with one!” So said
a marcher afternoon; the
relentless rain and the merciless mud gave point to the observation. Neither
rain nor mud deterred the women from their protest procession long ago, nor
did they have any daunting effect on
in the march from Kingsway to
Holloway. The change in attitude of the onlookers was extraordinary and
emphasises the educative influence of such demonstrations. No word of scorn
or ridicule was heard on ; such
words have passed; little but amazement remained, amazement at the courage
shown in trying weather conditions.
Truly it was a brave show. Bands and banners lend splendid aid on such
occasions, but the gratifying sight was to see the solidarity and
co-operation of many societies. The Women’s Tax Resistance League led the way,
and were followed by the Women’s Social and Political Union, the Women’s
Freedom League, the New Constitutional Society, and Actresses’ League, the
Fabian Women’s Group, and, finally, the men’s societies; the Men’s League
for Women’s Suffrage, the Men’s Political Union for Women’s Enfranchisement,
and the Men’s Committee for Justice to Women. Faithful friends these, whose
help is always available, and one could not help noticing that some of the
men were bringing up their small sons in the way they should go! Let us hope
that the boys will not have to do much more marching for the Suffrage Cause!
An hour of it! Who can describe the determination and courage needed? But we
arrived, and in a very few minutes the chairman, Miss Christabel Pankhurst,
was in her place on the cart, surrounded by the speakers. One’s eyes were
rivetted by the sight of the tall, self-possessed lady, quiet and
undemonstrative, who scarcely twenty-four hours before had been inside those
prison walls. The singing and the enthusiasm were to reach her in her cell,
but the action of the authorities in releasing Miss Housman enabled her to be
the seen instead of the unseen centre of the demonstration. Her words, too,
carried great weight. Humorously she contrasted the treatment of men voters
and of voteless women: agents to do everything for the men, motors to take
them to the polling booth. Turning to the prison, Miss Housman exclaimed
dramatically, “Holloway is woman’s polling booth; it is there that I have
been able to register my vote against a Government that taxes me without
representation.” Only words of courtesy were heard concerning all the
officials with whom Miss Housman had come into contact, and she was cheered
to the echo when she declared that, glad as she was to be outside Holloway,
she was ready to go back again to win the fight for the recognition of
woman’s citizenship. “If that great act of justice, the Conciliation Bill,
fails to carry next year, there will be not merely one but hundreds of women
in prison to make the nation realise that justice is not being done.” Thus
spoke Mr. Laurence Housman, whose pride in his sister’s devotion to the
woman’s Cause was shared by those who listened. Women were only doing what
men had gloried in doing in times past, he added, they were struggling for
constitutional liberties; women, too, had caught the spirit of democracy.
Mrs. Despard, heedless of the drenching rain, made an appeal which touched
the hearts of all who heard it; she rejoiced in the victory won by Miss
Housman’s courageous act of self-sacrifice, and said that tax resistance was
drawing women together in a bond as strong as death. She laughed to scorn the
idea that men had all the chivalry and clear-sightedness, women the
tenderness and self-sacrifice; neither sex had a monopoly of these qualities,
but she looked for the coming of the new day when man and woman should stand
side by side as equals. Miss Adeline Bourne, speaking for the actresses,
amused the audience by insisting that if women united in a protest such as
Miss Housman had made, the Government would be powerless to deal with them.
Mrs. [Margaret] Kineton Parkes, who succeeded Miss Pankhurst in the chair as
soon as the resolution had been moved, gave some remarkable facts as to the
predicament of the officials with regard to women tax resisters; amazing
differences of treatment were recorded for the same offence, as also the
practical sympathy of some who have to carry out a disagreeable duty towards
women resisters.
The resolution, which was passed unanimously and with enthusiasm, ran as
follows:
That this meeting, held at the gates of Holloway Gaol, congratulates Miss
Clemence Housman on her refusal to pay Crown taxes without representation,
a reassertion of that principle upon which our forefathers won the
constitutional liberties which Englishmen now enjoy, and also upon the
successful outcome of her protest. It condemns the Government’s action in
ordering her arrest and imprisonment as a violation of the spirit of the
Constitution and of representative government; and it calls upon the
Government to give votes to women before again demanding from Miss Housman
or any other woman-taxpayer the payment of taxes.
Miss Housman’s communication to the Home Secretary, asking for information
as to a definite term of imprisonment, contains so able a statement of her
point of view that it should be widely known. It runs thus:—
That she has resolved to abide by the conditions by law appointed for a
woman who, lacking representation, has personally fulfilled a duty — moral,
social, and constitutional — by refusing to pay taxes into irresponsible
hands. But, while willing to satisfy the requirements of the law at the
expense of her personal liberty to any extent, she learns that no limit has
been set to these claims either by statute or by judgment, and she believes
that it rests with his Majesty’s Secretary of State for the Home Department
to rectify what she feels to be a grievance not intended in such a case as
hers. She begs, therefore, that he will be so good as to define her term of
imprisonment, and she desires this not on personal grounds only, but that,
thereby, the comparative cost and value of a woman’s liberty and a man’s
vote may be officially recorded for the understanding of others, women and
men.
A large and enthusiastic crowd listened in Hyde Park on
morning to Mrs. Clarkson Swann, who
explained fully the Conciliation Bill now before Parliament, and to Mrs. Emma
Sproson, who has recently served six weeks in Stafford Jail for non-payment
of her dog-tax.…
