The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1895-03-09
INCOME TAX ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Seward Closes His Argument and AS
sistant Attorney General Whitney Opens
in Defence of the Law.

Washington, March SIN the income
tax hearing today, MIR. Seward devoted
himself to the consideration OF the con-
stitutionaI provisions and the intent
of the trainers of lat instrument in us
ing the words they did. Justice Gray
asked the counsel if in any controversy
prior to the esta blishment of the nation
regarding the stamp tax, etc, the words
"direct taxes" were used. "I think"
replied Mr.. Seward, there never was a
time in the history of the country that
state taxes were designated as other
than direct taxes" "rhe only difference
between the income tax of Massachu-
setts, imposed for 200 years, and the
present law" he added, "is the one is
collected by the state officials ana the
other by federal officials"
In response to a question by Justice
Gray, Mr.. Seward sad he was contend
ing Cor the position tha3 all taxes, other
than eXcses, imports and duties, should
be apportioned among the states, ac-
cording to the census. Mr.. Seward insist
ed that the words direct taxes" in the
constitution included the income tax,
because the people were tnen paying an
iucome tax, and for the same purpose
for which the present tax was asked, for
the support of the federal government.
He said: "It starts on its way and lands
in the treasury at Washington. 1t
starts at the same time and lands in the
state treasury at Boston. Because of
the Journey to Washington does it there
by become an indirect tax and remain
a direct tax withssrespeot to Boston? :
The Chief Justice interposed a ques-
tion implying dissenT from this view,
to which MIR. Seward made reply.
MIR. Seward closed at at 2. SO. and the
other side of the casse, in support of the
law, had it's first presentation by E. Is.
Whitney, assistant attorney general.
He outlined the difference between the
cases coming from New Y ork and that
arising in the District of Columbia, and
said that one of the New York cases,
Pollock VS.. the Farmers Loan and Trust
Company, might present questions aside
from those involving the full construct
ion of the income tax law. He made
the point that the New York municipal
bonds are not ubject to federal taxa
tion, and therefore the income therefrom
could not.be taxed. The application of
the tax of 1861 to the President and JUS
tices of the supreme court was referred
to by Mr.. Whitney, which gave rise to a
spiriteds colloquy between him and
Justice F ield. Mr.. Whitney said the
justices were assessed by the Treasury
Depsrtment under the opinion of Attor-
ney General Hoar.
"Oh, no, " interposed Justice Field,
"They made returns under the direct
orders of the department"
Mr.. Whitney, continuing, said that the
government had opposed the plea OF the
plaintiffs in the New York cases because
they did not want a precedent estab-
iished that the stockholders might en-
ioin corporation officials from paying
the tax when other remedies were open
to them. The case of Moor VS.. Miller
was ss-more direct assault upon the ira
ditions and practices of the Treasury
Department. His suit was in ivioIation
of section of the Revised Statutes
which expressly stated that no suit to
prevent the collection of any (federaD
tax shall be maintained by any court
| No case could be found in the books
| where an injunction had been granted.
| In the course of his further argument.
Mr.. Whitney was interrupted By Justice
Brown, with the remark that ifsthe tax
in question was an excise tax, then it
must be uniform Mr.. Whitney assepted.
| Justice White asked MIR. Whitney what
he understood by the word "uniform, 4"
and Mr.. Whitney replied must be uni
| form among the states that is without
discrimination against one state or in
| favor of another. That construction is
given it by Justice Story, by Justice
Miller in his lectures, and by decisions
tradicted. Without concluding his sd
dress, Mr.. Whitney suspended and the
court adjourned unsil Monday noon.