New-York tribune., 1870-04-13
THE INCOME TAX.
ITS UNcoNsTrTUTIoNALITY, INJUSTICE, AND
IMPOIICY.
!, AND

Ii, "
what follows this be So all that be said is that
the objection incurred the WEAKNESS of repetition
while the advantage gained is the greater concur
renee of opinion. With this excuse if any be neces-
sary we proceed to show what ii is believed has not
been previously tins shown, the private and public
injustice Of this unconstntionally imposed tax and
the mpocy Of its being continued. Proximate equal.
ity Of imposition and proximate certainty in their
results are the two chief prerequisites in system Of
adequate taxation.
recurrence to the policy of this nation shows tha.
these the ends sought to be obtained. The diff
Guilty arising out of the existence of Slavery in esab
fishing the of the numbers of the contrib
uting population led as TIE only alternative 10 the
provision in the eighth article of the confederation.
that the supplies to the common treasury" should
be ." in proportion to the value of all land within
each State granted or surveyed for any person. and
the buildings and improvements thereon, to be est
mated in such mode as Congress shall from time 10
time direct and appoint" the taxes for paying such
proportion to be levied by the Legislature of each
State
The almost impracticability of carrying this pro-
vision into effect chief of the institn-
ton of the present National Government. But il is
seen in its very terms to have contemplated system
of proportionate actual equality.
The provisions Of the present Constitution are seen
TO nave ma tne SAME purpose lDus, IN the second
section of the first article it is declared "Represen-
tatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among
the several States according to their respective
bers" thus as to both there is required numerical
e1uality In the eighth section of the same article
the great revenue power is expressed it is TO lay
and collect taxes duties imposs and excises to pay
the debts and provide for the general welfare of the
United States with the express restriction that all
duties imposts and excses shall be uniform through
out the United States 1t is that the required
uniformity is not applied to taxes" Whereforei
For the reason that the term taxes as used in the
Constitution applied solely to direct taxes as TO
which the rule of apportionment had been previous
ly fixed and, as though no precauton could be too
great to insure such apportionment, the ninth sec
ton of the same article superadds that " no capita
ton or other direct tar shall be laid, unless in proper
Gon TO the census or enumeration hereinbefore
directed to be taken"
As to the constiutionality of the income tax, the
question necessarily arises, whether 1t is OF s not
direct tax. And here may fairly be intro
duced the exposition given of the article OF
the Constitution, when presented to the people
of the United States for its adoption or rejection
The language of Hamilton on this point, in the Sth
number of The Federast is explicit The taxes" be
remarks intended to be comprised under the general
denomination of internal taxes, may be subdiyided
Though the objection be made to both, yet the
reasoning of it seems to be confined to the former
branch" The objection was that power of inter
nal taxation in tie National Legislature could never
be exercised with advantage.) He proceeds, " and.
indeed, as to the latter indirect taxes), by
which must be understood duties and excises
on articles of consumption If such be
true definition of indirect tax or if such be the
understanding of the people when they adopted the
Constitution, then, an income tax, not being duty
or an excise on article of consumption is as much
direct tax capitation or poll tax OF tax upon
lands or buildings which two taxes together, with
tax imposed by" a general assessment on the whole
property of individuals on their whole real or
personal estater at a later period Hamilton pro-
nounced to he the only direct taxes. All else" he
declared "must of necessity be considered as
indirect taxes" Thus in this his last definition, he
adhered to the former the true and necessary in
terpretaton of the Constitution in respect TO its
| revenue power.
"The Constitution" he says, gives power to
Congress to lay and collect the taxes, dnties, i'm
posts and excises, requiring that all duties, mpOsts
and excises shall be uniform throughout the United
States Here duties impost, and excises appear to be
contradstinguished from dres and while the latter
is left to apportionment, the former are enjoned to
be uniform"
stituton, does Hamilton stand alone. The concur
renee of Madison in the view is not to be ques
toned after his general approval of what had pre-
ceded it in the forty-rst and fortyffth numbers Of
the same commentary. But additional and precise
evidence is found elsewhere In his Genuine In
formation delivered to the Legislature Of Maryland
relative to the proceedings of the General Conven
tionn Luther Martin, of the delegates from that
State uses this language: "By the power to lay and
collect imposts, they may impose duties on any
and every article Of commerce imported into
these States. to what amount they please.
BY the power to lay ercses power very odous in its
nature Congress may impose duties every article
of use consumption. BY the power to lay and collect
tGres they may proceed to direct tdrdtion on e~y
individual either by capaton tax their heads or
an ASSESSMENT ON THEIR PROPERTY BY this part OF
the section, therefore, the Government has powerto
lay what duties they please goods imported; to lay
what duties they please afterward on whatever we
use or consume to impose stamp duties to what amount
they please and in whatever they please after
ward to impose the people direct dTes, by capta-
ton tax or by ASSESSMENT to what amount they
choose
Such being the true Interpretation of the revenue
power of the Constitution, derived from the con,
curing opinions Of two of the principal trainers ana
eXpOunders of the Constitution and OF one OF It's
leading objectng opponents il is clear that the pres
ent law imposing an income tax, as appned 10 IN
come derived from accumulated wealth ana es-
peciay in the form of income derived from real es
tate in two essential relations II ls
not apportioned according to numbers, ana IL is not
levied by " a general assessment" , .
And further, not being = general Dut uiscrun,-
mating assessment il is violation OF the principle
which governed in the formation OF the Revenue
power, proportionate equality OF taxation III mas
introduced into our system a class taxation, than
which nothing can be false in principle or more
dangerous and justly obnoxious in practice and