New-York tribune., 1868-02-14

special contract TO pay Government taxes upon the
interest The measure OF the defendants liability S ek
have nothing 90 with The taxes which Tie Government
may impose upon the plaintiff Tor the interest payable 10
him, Tie clause in the mortgage cannot enlarge the
duty which the mortgage was given TO secure-fhat *
the paynent debt and interest II Il to be found In all
mortgages and II the doctrines contended for by the
plaintiff be sound, the standard by which the impositon
on taxes should be regulated would be IN proportion tn
mans poverty. and not his wealth. for the mortgagor
would De bound 10 pay not only his own taxes but those
oI W .ne W MD NO ,,,taT,aI rsTc
tax these bonds al the place ~ his residcnce IT'S
somewhere and il to meet investments like this IN
banks railways insurance and other companies that the
ioined il as duty all such corporations 10 deduct
and withhold from al payments on account OF any l.e
coupons aud dividends due and payable the tax or
per cent ana provided that the payment OF the same
shall discharge the said companies from that amount Oh
the Interest or coupon unless where said companies have
contracted otherwise, and it properly so provided
for citizens Of the United States resident both at home
and abroad sometimes forget the Institutions In which
with the defcndans and instead Of $3.50 Judgment IS or
dered for plaintiff admitted 10 be due with interest
from the is of July 1857. 1he plaintiff appealed urging
that careful examination OF the l22d section OF the act
f the 90th of Tuue 1864 shows that the IA mposed in
is intended be laid the thing and not the person
siding I'm the United states or NOT: therefore, IL is tax
the thing, and not the person, the income as III
for Congress taxes the person OF foreigners,
taxing the thing property he the United States
II Is tax on the person or income Is unequal aS pc
citizen in his return of income If above $780, take
credit for the tax but the foreigner nonresident get
credit his income is not taxed. If it Is tax Oh IN
(as SUCH, Il is unequal in the most offensive cases.
viz: The citizen whose income exceeds SCOo 10 the
amount Of the tax withheld by the Railroad Company
can take credit in his return Of Income therefor; nut
citizen whose income does not exceed 500, Will have 10
pay the tax and get credit The familiar rule OF con-
strctOn requires that this tax he construed tax on
the thing and tho income for thus only can all the
provisions Of the stand tho contrary construction
would repeal the principal provision Of the ll6th section,
which fOrids any tax income, except in excess OF
5000 The provision "eNcept where the company
mQ OtlIerWlFC,'
not intended q tax on Income, for no railroad
company would contract To pay the lucome TAX ~ any
person. The above remarks are applicable 10 tie
5G7 but In the act OF July 1892 the WORDS
except when the said company may have instructed
otherwise" omitted. It may also be remarked tnt
the acts OF July ~, 1885, 9, aud March 1901 sec ~
declare that this duty Of Eve per cent shall be withheld
from al persons including n0nresdents whether ctl-
zers or aliens" This throws additional light on the M
tenOn Of Congress aud confirms the Interpretation t
it not income income. that was taxed put the
thing VIZ the interest coupon or dividend NO argu
nent Is fairly dcducibe that this l. tax on Income, from
the fact that the person who has an income above 5000
may deduct this from his income tax All that can
be Justly remarked IL that Congress did not intend 10
levy double Therefore, these taxes are not taxes
iaC onc hut the thing And the defendant cann0t
deitt such from the interest due for IL has contracted
otherwise" j Knox fOr plaintiff i'm error; r. Mcknight
e.. Il. "a, lint