Daily union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1865-1866, 1866-06-27
AN rMpoRTANT LAWSUIT.

An exchange says that the constitution
atty of the income law is to be tested by
citizen of Springfield, Ill, who reports,
under protest, an income of $4,000, and
will, it is said, refuse to pay his income tax.
When the usual compulsory action of the
revenue officer is invoked, he will apply to
Judge DAVIS, of the U. S. Circuit Court, for
an injunction to restrain the Government
official from collecting.
So far as we are informed, this is the first
step of the kind that has been taken or
threatened There may well be doubts as
to its propriety and expediency, but it Is
clearly the right Of a citizen, if he deems a
law of the government unconstitutional aid
unjust, TO take the sense Of the appointed
arbiters of justice on the question, and this
individual may esteem his contemplated
course but the discharge of high and sa-
cred duty to himself and his fellow citizens.
There is no doubt, however, of one thing
the taxes at present imposed in this country
are onerous to the last degree, whether laid
Justly or uniustly. If they are 4evied I'M
equally, or in contraventlon of the COnsti-
tuition, it should be known, and the legisla-
tive department of the government COM
PEELED to remove them in part, or distribute
them equally, and levy in the exact mode
the Constitution authorizes, and in no other.
The right and mode of taxation by govern
ments is one of the most difficult problems
in political science, and has elected asmuch
discussion and controversy as any other
subject connected with the ruling of States.
In the Convention which framed our Re-
publican scheme it engaged the profound
attention of the ablest minds in the body,
and provoked a debate which aroused much
acrimony of feeling. 1t was complicated
with the everlasting question of the powers
to be given to the government and those to
be reserved TO the States. 1t was long and
ably contended that to confer on the general
government a general power TO tax, and to
an unlimited extent, for the purpose of car
rying on the government, would result in
arming it with the power to absorb the entire
resources of the people, and though State
governments might be left with long list
of enumerated rights and reserved powers,
they would prove under such a system but
empty words on parchment; and that even
though States were given the power to tax
for domestic objects, the enormous drain
which the general government would be
empowered to make would effectually swal-
low it up by exhausting the resources
of the land; and thus there
despotism increasing by what it fed on. The
force of this argument was admitted even
by the advocates Of the system, and the very
ablest among them could only parry it by
urging that such an untoward result was to
be apprehended only when the general gov
eminent or those in whose hands it might
chance to be, had determined on usurpation.
The power to tax was given, but this gene
ration has seen that the fears Of the prudent
and cautious men of 1889 were not mis-
placed and that this limitless power to take
the peoples money in the name of taxes is
an inducement to usurration, and a means
of accomplishing the objects of usurping
! ambition
We favor the support of the government
and compliance with the laws, tax laws and
all, but the people should demand that they
be levied justly and equally, and that they
be expended economically on objects wholly
within the scope of powers cOnfded to the
government, and, that as soon as a necessity
for a tax ceases it should be abolished.