The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1895-05-23

He wanted, however, to cite one addition
al authority, the opinion of Justice
Strong in the case of Clark VS.. Sickle,
which he quoted at some length. He said
| this decision was significant and meant
virtually all incomes could be taxed.
Mr.. Harlan said he would later file
an opinion giving his views, and his views
as now presented would be of a very gen
eral character. Capitation taxes and
taxes on land, he concluded, should be
considered as direct, and they had been
uniformly held to be. He quoted from
| the views of Justices 1redell, Patterson
and others on the Interpretation of the
constitutional provision as to apportion-
ment, holding that the rule should be
so consulted only when it could be rea-
sonably apportioned. The changes CON
| templated from the former prayer in this
matter, Justice Harlan said, was little
less than q revolution. Every one con-
cedes that the decision in former cases
would have been the same as they were
| if there had been no reference in the con-
stitution to direct taxes.
| He held the tax on rents to be utterly
distinct from tax on the land from which
the rent was collected. A tax on land
| is generally lien on land, while that
on rents is not. In its essence a tax on
rents is q tax on money where the tax is
payable in money. He said that the pres
ent decision was a step in advance OF It's
| former decision and said incidentally that
| the present conclusion had been reached
| by a bare majority. In his Judgment,
to say nothing of the former holdings
of the court, the decision might well eX-
cite very grave apprehension in that ii
strikes at the authority of the govern
ment to protect itself in times of great
emergency. 1t is tendency to return
10 the old system of the time of the fed
Grafton before the constitution was adopt
ed. Such decision can not have any otner
effect than of arousing much indlgnamon
among the freemen of the country. Inc
majority opinion practically decides tha'
without an amendment OF the constltu'
tion such incomes can never be made to
contribute to the support of the national
government
In conclusion Justice Harlan said
"Such result is one deeply to be deplor'
ed. It can not be regarded otherwise
| than a disaster to the country. The prac,
1 teal effect is to give to certain kinds OF
nroperty a position of favOritism and adj
vantage that is inconsistent with the
;! fundamental principles of our social or
qanization and to invest them with power
! and influence that may be perlious u
that portion of the American people upor
: whom rests the larger part of the burdens
: and who ought not to be subjected u
: the dominion of aggregated wealth any
more than the property OF the, conntr!
) should be at the mercy of the lawless.
2 The views of no other member OF TN
court have been the subject OF so mucl
: Speculation as have those of justice
Jackson, who, it was thought, would bt
practically referee in the case
Justice Jackson said that his health na'
= not been equal to the task of preparlni
! a formal dissenting opinion and proceeded
TO give an outline of his views from notes
e His voice was at first feeble, but as h
= became interested in his subject he wa
e able to speak with more strength, al
:, though his reading was slow and inter
rupted by frequent fits of coughing, yer
: Dainful TO listners to. In beginning, lust
e ice Jackson announced that he cOncurre
t fully IN the dissents expressed by Justic
: White on the former hearing and the othe
: justices that dissented today. he said:
: at is not, and can not be denied tina
Q under the broad and comprehensive tax
t ing power conferred by the constitution
S congress- has the authority toNtax income
q from whatsoever source arising, whethe
: from real estate or personal property Q
n otherwise. 1t is equally clear that col
o gress. in the exercise of this authority
r has the discretion to impose the tax o