Daily independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 188?-1915, 1895-04-09
The Income Tax.

SAoASh VI OhO SOhlG Ill G1S
income tax case by stating exceptions
to the law as made by the CONSUL for
appellant, as follows:
THAT the act imposed direct
tax in respect to real estate, rents, is-
sues and profits as we'll as of income
and profits of'personal property, and
not being apportioned is in violation
of section 3, article l, of the constitu-
ton.
2.-That the law if not imposing a
direct tax is nevertheless unconstitu-
tional in that its provisions are not
uniform throughout the United States
and do not operate with the same
force and effect upon the subject of
the tax wherever found, in that it pro-
vides exemptions in favor of individ-
uals and co partnerships, while deny
ing all exemptions to corporations.
having a similar income derived from
like property values and provides for
other exemptions and inequalities and
is violation of section g. article l of
the constitution.
The Court noxt decided the tax was
unconstitutional as far as it related to
incomes from the state, county or
municipal bonds. It was the next
rule of fact that the law was pro-
nounced unconstitutional in these two
particulars, but it did not invalidate
the law as whole. It.was announc-
ed In this latter conclusion that the
Court was equally divided and there
fore rendered no opinion. The lower
court having ruled in favor of the law,
being divided court, the law would
stand except as to rent, state, county
and municipal bonds and on these
two points it was directed that the
judgment below be reversed.
3.-That the act provides no exemp-
ton Of tax upon incomes derived
from stock and bonds of the States,
United States and counties and munl-
CAPABILITIES therein which stocks and
bonds are no proper subjects for tax
ing by the powers Of Congress. The
income from these sureties in the
United Ststes amounts to over $780,
100000 per annum on which the total
annual income tax would be $780,
600. He then took up the constitu-
tional points involved, dwelling upon
the fact that the constitution required
the apportionment of direct taxes and
uniformity in excuses and imports. He
also dwelt upon the question of rep
resentation, and which was, he said,
foremost when the constitution was
adopted.
He then took up the question of di-
rect taxes, rents, and in so doing dis
cussed at considerable length the
question Of direct taxes as considered
at the time of the training Of the con-
stitution.
The trainers of the constitution, it
was said, were well versed in the
government of colonies and European
countries, and were we'll versed in
literature Of the period, including
works on political economy and well
calculated to pass intelligently on
matters of this kind.
He quoted various Supreme Court
decisions and sought to show while
the income tax question had been be.
fore the court, the question had only
been considered as applying to the
point at'issue In the particular case.
Coming down to the present tariff ACT
he said the law was passed in the time
Of profound peace, and it was to be
taken as evidence, that Congress
had sought in this matter to form a
precedent and establish a departure
from established lines, and it there,
fore became important to inquire into
the circumstances with some atten.