The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-05-25

| 1868 to 1870, and entitle the persons who
| paid it to come In now and claim re-
| endorsement, was presented to Attorney
| j. E. Richards last evening.
at must have escaped Mr.. Olney' s
| mind" said Mr.. Richards, ''that the con-
stitutionality of the income-tax law passed
| during the war was tested in the United
States Supreme Court. The court held
| that the constitution conferred the power
on the legislative branch of the Govern
ment to levy tax on incomes.
Nov the present decision cannot give
persons who paid during the war an OPP
portunity to go into the courts for relief in
the way of repayment. The only remedy
for them that can see now is before the
Court of Claims. No citizen can sue the
United States without permission of Con-
gress, and it is beyond belief that Congress
would authorize suits for sums OF such
magnitude as would be involved herein.
And further than that continued Mr.
Richards, "the decision of the court de-
claring unconstitutional the law of 1894
does not touch the law of 1863. The Su-
preme Court may reverse itself, but it does
not affect taxes collected under the former
law. The law of 1868 was declared constr
tutional and the decision touching that
act was not reversed.
The law stood until it was repealed in
1870 or 1872, whenever 1T was repealed. a
person going to the United States and say
ing, "You must return this money which
you wrongfully collected because the act
was illegal" would receive the answer: eff
there was no law authorizing the tax to be
imposed and collected you made volun-
tary gift of the money to the Govern
ment." Perhaps the Identical person who
caused the suit to be instituted for testing
the law would say: 81 did not pay volun-
tarily, went into court asserting that Con-
gress had no right to impose the tax" He
ha inf
court, and the highest tribunal in the land
affirmed the right of Congress under the
constitution to impose the tax. In law
you have exhausted your remedy, but you
may ask Congress to pass bill for your
relief, or you may file your suit in the
Court of Claims"
The Court of Claims to which reference
was made in the interview with Mr..
Richards was created during the war,
or Just after the close of the
struggle, to hear and determine claims
of various kinds. The Government, in its
hour of necessity, took the property of
loyal as well as disloyal citizens, and in
the stir and rush of war many vouchers
were imperfectly issued, and in many in
stances no written evidence was given that
property had been appropriated or confis-
Gated. How many millions of dollars were
awarded for relief the court records only
can tell.
1t is estimated that San Francisco paid
to the Federal Government during the in
come-tax era at least $S,000,000.
w. w. Montague, who paid tax on
considerable income during..the war, was
of the opinion that the first steps to test
the sense of the Government on the ques-
ton of repayment would not be taken in
San Francisco, but held that many people
here would get in without much delay if
claims for reimbursement were filed in the
East
"Our people in San Francisco said Mr..
Montague, regarded the income tax as
war measure, justified by the necessities
of the Government, and it was paid cheer
fully on that principle. That idea was
clearly expressed by Justice Field in the
introduction of his recent opinion on the
tax of 1894. We are now as a nation at
peace with all the world, and there is no
necessity for straining the constitution to
impose tax, inquisitorial and unpopular,
which only great emergency can justify"
A large sum was paid as income tax by
Mr.. Carroll, who founded the house of
Carroll d Carroll, but the younger men,
bers of the family, who have succeeded to
the business since the death of the founder,
have paid little attention to their an
cestor's transactions with the Government
in the ''sixties."
G. L. Barker formerly belonged to the
firm of Wellman, Peck IL Co. and paid his
income tax with the others in 1864.
Henry l.. Dodge of the house of Dodge,
Sweeney IL Co. was in the Sixties as
now, a prosperous man of affairs. He
paid the income tax, as did others, and re-
garded the payment as necessary for the
preservation of the Government. At that
time California could not spare men to re-
enforce the armies in the field on the
Potomac and Mississippi, but her people
had money to contribute and they gave it
nlxv <f
voluntary contributions to the sanitary
fund. For instance, Captain ]. B. Thomas
gave as much as $250,000 to the sanitary
fund. Trenor w. Park and many Others
gave freely and largely after Thomas Starr
King aroused powerful Union sentiment
on this coast.
sat one period" said Mr.. Dodge, "Cali-
fornia was trembling on the verge of seces-
sion. Public sentiment wavered and the
press was timid, if not cowardly. A firm
and resolute stand on behalf of the Union
was not taken by the great masses of the
people until the eloquence of King moved
them to sense of their responsibility"
P. N. Lllienthal, manager of the Anglo
California Bank, doubted very much if the
merchants of San Francisco who paid the
war income tax would institute proceed
lngs to recover the money SO paid to the
Government. He remarked: g"Michael
Reese and Nicholas Luning are dead and
the merchants now living would not want
the public to know what small incomes
they possessed at that time"
Henry L. Payot, now of the house of
Payot, Upham & Co., was in business dur
ing the war and paid his share of the tax.
He was not in town yesterday, but his
partner, Mr.. Upham, was sure that the
amount paid was not large enough to JUS
tify proceedings in the Court of Claims to
recover it. He was of the opinion, more
over, that Mr. Payot paid it cheerfully, be-
cause the Government needed money, and
would not ask for repayment now.
Mr.. Sadler of the firm of Mau, Sadler &
Co. was in business on this coast in the
sixties" He paid the tax, but the
amount contributed was SO small that it
passed out of his mind.
The tax was paid by Holbrook, Merrill &
Stetson, Levi Strauss g. Co., Murphy Grant
g. Co., James Moffatt of Blake Moffatt &
Towne, and in fact by all the well-known
mercantile houses doing business at that
time. There were no very large incomes
here in the "sixties." The assessment
roll of 1864 shows the names of only few
men whose personal property assessment
reached 100000 each. According to popu-
lation the wealth was large in the district,
but SO distributed that 5000 of the 10000
voters were income-tax payers.
The income tax law of 1894, recently de-