The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1895-05-09
WHITNEY CLOSES HIS ARGU
NrrNT AND OLNEY FOLLOWS
WITH HIS.
ruoATE'S ARGUMENT FOR THE
APPELLANTS.
Nearly Every Section of the Country
Has Had Plenty of Rain-The State
Depar ment Intervenes in Be-
half of Fuentes.

Washington, May 7.-When the second
6ay Of The rehearng in the income tax
cases in the supreme court of the u litel
States today began, Assistant Attorney
General Whitney resumed his argument
for a reversal of the former opinion OF
the court in the question of the validity
of federal tax on incomes derived uom
rents. Mr. Whitney argued ar great
length TO now that the present income
tax is not tax imposed npOh land nor
upon rents because they are derived flOm
lands. bat upon property of all kinds
accrued TO the owner within the year,
/. ,spectvo of its source.
On the question of uniformity he said he
had nothing to offer that had not been
given in the original hearing, but he re-
ueatcd some of these for the purpose, he
said, Of Of setting the opposite side right
as to the position of the government.
Mr.. Whitney finished speaking at 2:2O
u. H., ami Attorney General Olney ad-
dressed the court. Speaking of the ques-
ton Of the real estate rents, the "Lt0r-
ney general said:
III is important to bear in mind the
1recise question. 1t is not whether the re
may not be a tax on rents, which must
be n raX on the land producing them. 1t
IL not whether a land tax is measured by
rents or rental value, nor the most
efficient nor the most scientific way oil
rnXing the land. The most superficial
examinations show that no real estate
tax as s1pl is intended by congress. II
If had been, there would have been a
provision Or the appraisemcnt, by rental
revenue on otherwise, of vacant ana I'M
productive land. If it had been there
would have been provision for the cp-
Nraiscnanl' by rental value or otherwise
of houses md grounds which are occupied
as resorts md for purposes "f ,'rivate cn..
ioyment nd pleasure. The owner of
vacant productive lands held FOR IN
yastmcnt n speculation, whether they be
city lots cl thousands of unimprOved acres,
paws nltIilg under this law on account
OF such ands. The millionaire who has
q million lOllar mansion in the city ana
an equally costly residence by, the sea sea
shore pays nothing under this law. Ihe
manufacturers or the railroad corporation
the very uasis of whose business is, the
integast OF the real estate occupied or
,t therefor, pays nothing on account OF
such real estate 1t is impossible to con-
tend. therefore, that this law contem-
plates such real estate as subject to taxes
imposed by it. If the distinction between
personally and realty in the matter Of
taxation ; made by the constitution ltselt
and that is the necessary assumption
NJ tha oy.sument-where does this court
get the authority to set it aside as matter
of form No such authority exists. Ihe
constitutional discrimination between
reaIfv and personality for taxable pur-
noses would not exist if the trainers OF
fhe constitution had not considered it n
mAtter OF substance. 1t may be that the
tax upon personality in the shape OF rents
is the same thing to the landlord pecunl-
ori'y rs a tax upon the land itself. But
tbe landlords are not the only. parties
concerned. The whole people of the coun-
frv are interested since to them it is of the
frst Importance that the constitution
should he respected in its entirety ana that
no branch of government should UNDER
take 10 deal with any part of it as a mere
matter of form. 1t is intmated that,
logically speaking, if tax on real estate
rs q direct tax, so is tax on personal
,sOr0perty. and that if tax on rents Is a
h tax on real estate so is tax on inIeresC
and dividends a tax on the capltal pro-
duripc them. 1t is suggested, too, that
this new expounding of the constitution
is q triumph for private rights and prop
arty and set up in their defense bulwarkss
that have been too long overlooked, and
negiected. The suggestion only, shows
how easy it is to lose sight of the. spirit
that giyeth life while closely sticking to
the Letter that killeth. No one will deny
that in linking taxation and representa-
ton inseparably together our forefatthers
aspired to system of taxation which,
being ordained by the peoples own repre-
4 sont9t;vaI would be certain to distribute
the nublir burdens with the nearest pos
sible approach to this justice and equity:
Yet tie current of events is such that
this very principle is now involved to
nullify the tax, the exact object and pur-
pose of which are to rectify the wrongs