The Tiffin tribune. (Tiffin, Ohio) 1868-1887, 1874-06-04

claims for this man, aud with which
II Is sought TO cover up or exIenuate
these glaring irregularities. Give to
any man Of common capacity the
manipulation Of the entire force Of the
Treasury Department at Washington.
and add to this the aid Of the wIlfnIly
misled Internal Rsvenus officers
throughout the country, backed by
the best legal talent to direct in the
hunt for uneolleeted taxes, with sDe-
eial letters estOpping all supervisors
and collectors from collecting
such taxes as this person might claim
were his particular province, by con-
tract, to collect, and such results and
successes might follow; and what be-
comes, then, OF the assertions Of the
gentleman from Massachusetts,, Mr..
B1tler, who comes forward with Rp-
parent alarm and with 80 much alac-
rity to the defense OF Sanborn In his
i'll gotten gains at the expense Of An
already impoverished and overbur-
dened Treasury?
Mr.. Speaker, my time will not per-
init me to further indulge In giving
the details Of this disreputable affair.
Each case has its history Of irregular
ity and wrong.
now come to the paragraph 10 the
gentleman's speech which Is IS re-
markable for It's boldness 10 charging
/ improper motives upon some who
have taken q part in this matter as lt
Is weak and unfounded as = matter of
fact and law.
The gentleman from Massachusetts
says:
In The year lS70 We passed an act repeating
/ the taxes on legacies and SUGGESTIONS aud ON
various other things, gross earnings OF rail-
roads and various other sources Of reyenue.
/ no more assessors; and We abolished the Gu
tire body Of assessors From that Lour no
taxes could be assessed upon these delln-
quents; and by the law no collector OF inter-
nal revenue as such could collect a tax that
was not returned to him by an assessor on
the list given him by au assessor. And.
therefore, mere were these legacy and suS-
eeSSiOn taxes, and these taxes on railroads,
gross earnings and dividends, which have
been kept back, and which were still kept
BACK Tor tour years, could not and would no
be collected. The limitation for assessment
and suits for penalties runs Oub in i've year
In a very few months more the law OF HmI-
tation ould run against all these taxes.
Now, those taxes were not assessed those
taxes were not on any revenue officers
! books.
The taxes on legacies and success
sions were repealed by the third sec-
ton Of the act OF July IA, ITO, (l6
Statutes 1T Large, page 256,) which
provides /:
That on and after the lst day Of October,
1870, the taxes imposed by the internal rsye-
nue. laws now in force herein specified be,
and the same are hereby, repealed.
Legseies and SUGGESTIONS were part
of the taxes referred to as repealed.
Section II Of the same act, hoWev-
er, (l6 Statutes at Large, page 26l,)
provides:
That all aess and parts Of acts relating 70
the taxes repealed by section referred 10
YiOns Of said acts shall continue in full force
for leVytng and collecting all taxes properly
assessed, or hdote 20 De dSsessec, or GecTUfllg
under the provisions OF former acts,
and for maintaining and continuing liens,
hnes, penalties and forfeltures Incurred un-
der and by virtue thereof.
And the same section Iurther pro-
vides
That this act shall not be construed to af-
feet any act done, right accrued, or penalty
incurred, under former acts, but every such
right Is hereby saved.
1t viii be seen by these distinct pro-
visions that the gentleman must have
overlooked entirely, or having read,
recklessly disregsrded them, In his al
legations made to the House. The
taxes accruing prior to the 1st day of
October, 1870, were saved to the Gov
ernmenG, and all the machinery nee
essary for their collection was also
saved to the Government, without
limit as to the time.
The same in regard to the income
tax, which expired on Dec. lsE, 1871.
With reference to the limitation as
to the right to assess taxes, the Law
and the decisions Of the United States
courts give them just this effect and
no other. The right to assess the tax
es was put by the law in the hands OF
the assessor, and after his list was re-
turned To the collector, the right TO
collect WAS put In the hands Of the
collector whether the amount 10 be
collected was large or small. The col
lection was made by q warrant Of dis
traint, q summary process, which
could be levied and executed inside OF
thirty days. Inasmuch as the gener-
al intent Of the law and spirit Of the
| Institutions Of this country require
that the property of q citizen, as q
/ general rule, shall only be taken away
by judicial process and after an inVes-
tigatiOn by jury OF his countrymen,
it was very wisely provided that II q
tax was not assessed or collected with
in fifteen months from the time IL
had accrued under the law TO the
Government, the presumption should
be raised that there was some doubt
about the prOpriety OF its assessment
or collection, otherwise the delay
would not have occurred In doing so.
After that length OF time the citizen
with prOpriety and safety could only
be held by the ordinary course Of Judi
elal investigation. IL am right In
this reasoning, and Am borne out by
the decision Of the Supreme Court 70
this effect, It follows that that limita-
tiOn was simply one to as to the sum-
mary disposition OF the property OF
the citizen, and not As 70 the extent
Of bis liability In the matter Of time
to the Government.
in the case OF the Dollar Savings
Bank Of Pittsburgh against q collect
or at that place, the Supreme Court Of
the United States has very recently
decided that a tax which may be due
under the Internal Revenue laws Of
IA4O OnANEa Ot8eI1 70 . AIOL HULL kA40
citizen, and can be recovered by aSuit
at law, whether assessed or not, not
Withstanding the fifteen months had
passed. Nor can any State or other
statutes Of Limitation as to suits affect
the right Of the Government 70 sue.
And Lhis is in strict aecordanee with
that familiar principle Of the law
which Is the law not only Of this
country now as IL &lways has been,
but also was the law OF England for
many years-that no statutes Of limi-
tation apply TO debt due TO the SOW
ereign power unless that power IL
specifically mentioned in the law en-
acting such Limitation. Express au-
thOrity Is given by the internal-reve-
nue. laws 10 sue for taxes, lee section
Al of the act OF July 80, 1884, ss
amended In 1855; IA Statutes at Large,
page ILL., There is no law limiting
debts due to-day, or II due and unpaid
any day since the law went into ef-
feet in the fall Of 1882, they ezn be re-
covered by suit now or st any time
during this or the next century, unless
COngress-Vhati it has not yet done
passes an act limiting the Govern
ment's rights in such matters.
The limitation Of five years spoken
Of by the gentleman from Msssacbu.
setts does not apply to cases Of tazss
and penalties recovered by suits. The
| gentleman must have known, or
would have known had he taken the
/ trouble TO examine the question, that
il spplied exclusively to criminal PrOs-
eclitiOns and such fines and penalties
as are imposed by criminal courts -
q punishment for crime, and not 10
the recovery by civil proceedings Of
taxes and what In the internal-rey-
! enue laws are termed "assesssble
penalties" So that the whole Of the
/ allegation Of the gentleman 10 regard
to the taxes being IN danger By lapse
Of time, and the argument from that
that there vas necessity for these
contracts, falls to the ground when
examined in the light VI the law as
it is now aud has been since the In
ternal-Fevenues system was brst sdopt-
ed. AS / have said, there b no
limitation by which the right 70
I these taxes can become lost 70 the
Government by lapse Of time. I'm
der the Law Is it stands nov they VIII
be iust as fresh and operative agslnst
the taxpayers at the end Of this CEN