St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-05-09
REHEARINC CLOSED
Argument in Income Tax
Case Was Concluded Yes
terday.
CHOATE'S ABLE WlND-UP.
Mutual Insurance Companies
Come in for a Severe
Scoring.
DECISION Is NOW AWAITED.
Courts Conclusions Expected
to Be Announced on
May 20.
DECISION is NOW AWAITED

WASHINGTON, May 8.-The re-
hearing of the income tax case IN the
supreme court was concluded at
o'clock today, and the nine justices
took the question Of the acts constltu-
tionality in whole or any part under
consideration. On the 10th OF THIS
month the court will meet, probably
for the last time this term, to render ITS
decision in pending cases, and 1t IS eX-
pected that it's conclusions upon the
income tax case will be announced at
that time.
Mr.. Joseph H Choate, of New York,
finished the closing argument, which
he began yesterday, speaking until 2
o'clock and receiving the closest atten-
ton from the justices and crowd OF
spectators. 1t has been generally re-
marked that interest in the rehear1ng
has been much less intense than at
the first argument. Justice Jackson
was one of the most attentive Of the
nine men on the bench throughout the
hearing, and seemed to have borne
the strain well, considering the con-
dition of his health. Mr.. Choate toCk UP
for examination the argument Of the
attorney general, that if the dec sion in
regard to rentals was to stand, there
should be no limit Of time the ex-
emption should run. The attorney
general had pleaded that with such a
ruling in force it might be impossible
to ever tax the proceeds
DERIVED FROM RENTS,
however they might be invested. Mr..
Choate said, in reply, that it was
sufficient that the law left no such
question open. The provision was for
taxing rents at the moment Of their
receipt, and he, for one, should not be
so foolhardy as to claim that when the
rent money should be reinvested it
would not be subject to the original
ruling in court in this case. Mr.. Choate
contended that of the vast sum ex-
pended in the civil war very small
proportion had been derived from the
income tax, which was in operation at
that time. Taking up the thread of
his affirmative argument, Mr. Choate
declared that the question of taxation
had been one of the most prominent
in the minds of the trainers of the
constitution. The members of that
body were the representatives Of the
men who knew all about the question,
for they had studied it here as their
ancestors had in England under the
Plantagenets, the Stuarts and the
Tudors. Mr.. Choate then proceeded
upon the basis that the court had de-
cided that lands were to be free from
direct taxes, and that there was to be
no difference for tax purposes between
the body of the land and it's proceeds.
He then entered upon the discussion
Of the undecided questions, contending
that there were the same reasons for
EXEMPTING INCOMES
that existed for exempting bonds and
real estate. Justice Harlan asked
Mr.. Choate if he meant by general
tax on personal property a tax on
all personal property of every kind
mot ALL" Mr.. Choate replied, "be-
cause 1 admit the right of exemption
Justice Harlan-Does a tax that
reaches only a part Of personal prop
erty come under that heading?
Mr.. Choate-In New York there is
vast body of citizens, except in
mates of tenement houses, nearly one
half of the population, yet I call a
OQnQra1
the exemption. 1t is tax that can
not be shifted and a tax that cannot
be avoided, but the question where a
tax on real estate can be shifted 1
will leave to political economists with
whom 1 have no relations and hope
never to have relations.
Mr.. Choate looked at the attorney
general when he spoke of political
economists, and there was laughter,
a rare demonstration in the supreme
court. Justice Harlan asked if the
counsel would call tax on the
INCOME OF BONDS
a direct tax that would have to be ap-
portioned, and upon receiving an af-
firmative reply, asked if the same was
true of a tax on banking.
Mr.. Choate-That is a business, and
this court has over and over again
decided that congress can tax a busi-
ness.
In discussing the principle of stare
decisis, which he defined as the rule
of standing by a former decision
whether right or wrong, he said that
of the justices had only consented
to the former decisions in Difference
to that principle. "Your honors are
sworn to obey the constitution as the
primal law. Every act of congress
stands in the light of it, or must fall.
Must not every decision of this court
that is found to be in conflict with the
constitution by the light of the latest
evidence and the most complete in
formation also fall?"
Then Mr.. Choate continued. "Re-
garding the statement that
FORMER INCOME TAXES
will have to be paid back if the court
sreverses the Springer rule, there is
no Springer rule, l submit that with
such consequences as that your honors
have nothing to do. This is not an ar
gument addressed to the question Of
law or of constitutionality. A moral
argument, the attorney general calls
it. I call it an immoral one.- The
idea of the attorney general standing
d up here for the nation and asking that
because the government has collected
much money Illegally in the past, it