The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1895-06-03
DECIDED BY ONE MAN
The Income Tax Law Virtually An
nulled By a Single Hand.
REV. MR.. SHEPARD'S VIEWS
Conclusions Drawn From the Re-
cent Action of the Supreme
Court BY Minister of the Cos
pel-Effects of the Decision.


come Tax" taking for his text Gala
tians VI, 2. Bear We one another's
burdens and so fulfill the law OF
Christ" The speaker said:
This question of the income tax the
supreme court has recently decided to
the satisfaction of only a portion of
our people and not even Of the court
itself. None of the vital problems of
our age have been settled to the perfect
satisfaction of our nation. We lack
common ground on which all classes
can agree in settling the issues which
we meet in politics and morals. have
no new solution to propose. but in the
present troublesome dilemma which
the income tax law has presented, /
wish to urge afresh the Christian
remedy.
Under the impression that the rich
are growing richer and the poor poorer.
the proposal has been made that we
should tax the rich in proportion to
their wealth for the benefit of the poor
by levying interest on their income.
Congress passed the law, but the
constitutional right of congress TO i'm
pose this tax was speedily questioned.
The constitution states that all direct
taxes shall be apportioned among the
within this union. according to their
respective numbers, which shall be de =
teTmined by adding to the whole num-
Der of free persons. three-fifths of all
other persons Thus no direct tax Is
constitutional which does not fall on
rich and poor alike. The question then
remains, is the income tax direct? II
IL is, ii is Illegal and cannot be en-
forced.
THE supreme court must remove the
doubt. All cases in law and equity
arising under this constitution are de-
cided by this court and it's inferior
courts. The decision OF the supreme
court has been considered final. There
Il no higher court to which we could
appeal This court decided that a part
of the law which congress had passed
for an income tax was legal. 1t was
divided in its opinion. and its decision
was reached by a majority of only one.
The question has been reconsidered,
and one justice had changed his mind.
The law is overthrow by the vote Of
Chief Justice Shiras. Constitution and
congress and court have been inter
preted to the whole United States by
one man.
The predicament is most unfortu-
nate. Several new questions are raised.
The court has overthrow it's previous
decision. 1t has condemned a law
which congress had passed. The pub
lie is left at sea. Enemies of our gov
eminent and agitators will not lose
this opportunity to cast reproach upon
our land. They will say: Can one man
rule our nation? Is this republican,
ismE Then the poor must see-saw
between the divers views Of the court
and have no redress. The dilemma is
not reassuring. We belittle our law
in the public mind, and invite its vio-
lation.
This is the puzzling and dishearten-
ing side of the eXigency in which we
find ourselves. There is a brighter
view which we may adopt. First, the
constitution may be amended. 1t
was made for the people. 1t is in the
peoples power. Two-thirds of the two
houses of congress, or two-thirds of
our state legislatures, can call for
amendments, and the sanction of these
amendments by three-fourths of the
states in our union makes the amend
ments law.
yet this does not reach the root of
our problem. Ii is not always the ma
jority that is right. The minority is
not always wrong. Right is never ST
fenced, though defeated, and sadly,
too, the wrong is not always willing
to submit to rights majority. A
speck of rot in the apple insures its
final decay, and when three-fourths is
rotten the poor sound quarter is
doomed. Thus royalty looks upon our
grand republic and predicts it's ulti-
mate ruin. If democracy is like the
apple which has fallen from its parent
tree, the criticism of monarchy will
be fulfilled. We shall hang in the bal
ances of law till they rust from their
bearings and we fall to the earth. We
shall remain at the mercy of divided
courts, and rapacious wealth will vie
with selfish poverty and kill both rich
and poor. But If we are still growing
on the tree of truth and justice, where
honor and equity are the vital saps
there can be no fatal disease in our
flesh, and we shall live and conquer.
There is a single element beneath
the surface of our troubles which has
Christian principle of burden bearing.
1t is the spirit of self-sacrifice. This
force produces a society where rich
and poor help one another, in mutual
sirvice for the common good. This
principle may need constitution and
a court, but they will be its servants.
The fault of our nation is that rich
and poor are selfish to truth and JUS
tice. The poor man sells his vote and
seeks recovery from consequent loss,
by voting for an income tax" The
rich man buys the vote and then ac-
cuses the poor man of bringing ruin on
himself. Both are wrong, and till they
work together in each others interests
neither can expect prosperity.
Every question has two sides and
neither side gains by disappearing
its opponents. l wish TO look as inn
partially as possible at some aspects
of wealth and poverty as they furnish
the motive of the proposed tax.
Wealth is often earned when riches
are a Just reward of industry. Even
inherited property. which has been ac-
cumulated by worthy and hon
est means. may justly remain
in the hands of its in
heritors TO the advantage of the
masses. Self-denial sobriety. and in
dustry produce business skill. and this
skill brings honest wealth. IL is dis
couraging to honest money-makers
when any law allows premium upon
unworthy qualities at the expense of
worthy ones. Indulgence, intemper-
ance and idleness should not be allow
ed to fatten on producers for no other
reason than that they are rich.
The great man takes great risks for
which he is entitled 20 the possibility