Connecticut western news., 1895-05-09
WITH A FULL BENCH.
THE INCOME TAX REFERRING IN
 PROGRESS AT WASHINGTON.

Attorneys Guthrie and Whitney Open With
 Long Arguments. and There Are Several
 More Speeches to Come From the Other
 Lawyers-Much Interest Evinced.
 WASHINGTON, May 7.-The supreme court, with its full membership of nine justices on the bench for the first time in many months began the rehearing of the Income tax suits Justice Howell Jackson of Tennessee, who has been absent from Washington the greater part of the past year seeking restoration to health, took his seat again, with extraordinary interest at- tached to his presence, since he assumes practically the position of umpire upon the vital question of the principle upon which the law is based which divided the other eight justices into two equal factions.
 Justice Jackson did not appear to be feeble, but it was plainly evident that be was far from being we'll man, and that only by a strong effort could he sit throughout the hearing
 Most conspicuous among the spectators in court were Postn, nster General Wilson, the chairman of the ways and means com- mittee that framed the tariff act; Repre- sentative MoMillin of Tennessee, chair man of the subcommittee which drafted the income tax provisions, and ex-Speak- CT Crisp of tho house. The attendance of lawyers and others having an unofficial interest in the matter was noticeably smaller than at the first argument of the law, and after the usual contingent of cas- ual tourists had satisfied their curiosity to obtain sight of the prominent men the courtroom was not crowded.
 But two arguments are to be made for each side-by Attorney General Olney | and Assistant Attorney General Whitney | for the government and by W. D. Guthrie | and Joseph Choate of New York for the | appellants, Messrs. Hyde and Pollock. MT. Guthrie delivered his speech. and Mr. | Whitney began his, which he will finish today. As the time assigned is five hours 1 to each side the arguments will be closed | Wednesday afternoon.
 MT. whitney's Argument Whom MT. Guthrie concluded, he was | followed by Assistant Attorney General | Whitney on behalf of the government MT. Whitney complained of the brief time given for preparing for the rehearing. | He said the government would not again present any argument on the question of municipal bonds. He said the law did not expressly include bonds of this oharac- ter, and he did not suppose it would be contended that these exemptions by the | court would invalidate the remainder of the law. He did not suppose, indeed. that | any tax law had ever been enacted which made express mention of all possible ex- | emptions. If such a requirement. were | to be applied, there would be very few | valid laws It was necessary for the leg | islatures to prepare their laws on general | terms, leaving it to the courts to declare | what parts should be valid
 | As to the question of exemptions of | rentals of real estate, that was different. The government had hopes that this ques: | tion could be so presented as to obtain a reversal of the former opinion. In the first instance the government had oonsid- cred that the question was settled by for | nor adjudication.
 | Mr. Whitney, in criticising the opposi- | tion for going so far back into history for | precedents, said he had not intended to go back further than 1889, but as the appel | lants had gone to 1180 he would himself give some precedents of that date.
 Cant you. '" asked the chief justice in a tone which appeared to contain a spirit of banter, go back further than that"
 II might, replied MT. Whitney, but 1 should not tax the patience of the court to that extent but for the precedent of my learned friends on the other side" He said he would agree to stop short of 1lS0 l if MT Choate would, whereupon Mir Choate assured Mir. Whitney and the court that he would stop several centuries short of that date.
 Difference Between Tax and Duty.
 Mir. Whitney referred at some length to the distinctions between the words tax and duty in English legislation. He said this distinction had been very sharp and the word tax had only been applied when the word duty could not be made to cover the case. If, he said, the framers of the constitution were acquainted with Black stone, they were familiar with the Eng fish classification. ."#.
 A peGuliarity of the English system since 1889 was that everything called a tax was laid by the rule of apportionment, whereas everything called duty was laid by the rule of uniformity The thorough understanding of this principle by the members of the convention explained the apparent lack of interest in the discussion of the distinction in these matters. The important question with them appeared to be that of the proper distribution of the taxes to be made according to apportion- ment. He oontended that the direct taxes were traceable to the English and taxes.
 and 1t was impossible to levy such tax except by apportionment. The system of apportionment among countries was the same in this country in the early days as in England
 The Knights of the Shire had control of
 these matters, and these gentry, Mir. Whit
 ney said, were what the counsel on the
 other side would call somewhat populistic
 in their tendencies. The valuation fixed
 in 1899 had been ever since used as the
 basis of apportionment in England.