The Roanoke times. [volume] (Roanoke, Va.) 1890-1895, 1895-04-18
The INCOME TAX MIDDLE.
The Attorney.GeneraI Files a
Memorandum
In the United States gu preme COURT, Show
Ing eho Position Hold by the Govern
ment-Internai Revenne Collectors Do
Not Seem to MISUNDERSTANDING Re-
turns All Mixed Up-omoials Refuse to
Talk About 1t.

WASHINGTON, April 17.-The inter-
nal revenue officials positively decline
to make public any statement in regard
to income tax returns or to answer anv
questions relating thereto. It Is learned
that the real GAUGE of this reticence ia
the great number of plumbers made by
the collectors in their telegraphic re-
ports received yesterday and to-day.
Some OF them contained only the num-
Der OF returns received last Monday
while others included all that had been
received from the beginning. A num-
Der OF them include the figures of oil
returns, Including those below the
$4,000 exemption, while others ex-
Guided returns on which no tax ia
payable.
Who is blameable for this state of
things Is not stated, but the result Ia
that from what has been received no
Intelligent estimate can yet be given of
sne numo per or the amount of returns
nieo with the collectors. 1t Is undoubt-
edly true that large percentage of the
persons subjecs to the law have made
no returns at all, and in consequence
the officials see ahead of them a vast
amount of litigation and trouble.
The Attorney General to-day filed in
the United States Supreme Cours a
memorandum for the consideration of
the justices giving the Governments
view on she petition for rehesrinp of
the income question filed by the oppo--
nents OF the law. The Rovernment's
memorandum is as follows:
Charles Pollock, appellant, vs. the
FARMERS Loan and Trust Company ct.
al; Lewis 81. Hyde, appellant, vs.. the
Continental Trust Company of the city
OF New York, ct. al. On petition for
rehearing, the United States respect
fully represents, that II rehearipg Ia
granted In the above entitled GASES, the
rehesring ahould cover sill the legal
and constitutional questions involved.
and not merely those as to which the
court ia thoroughly divided.
i. whether tax on incomes Qen-
EARLY, Inclusive OF rents and interest
OF dividends from Investments Of all
kinds, Ia or Ia not direct tax within
the meaning Of the federal constitution
ID matter, upon an original Q question, the
government has really never been heard.
LIS position at the argument YVES that
the questions had been settled-by an
EXPOSITION Of the constitution practi-
cally contemporaneous with its adop-
zion, and by q subsequent unbroken
line OF judicial presidents, by the con-
curing and repeated action of all the
departments OF the Government, and by
the consensus OF all text writer's and au-
thorities by whom the subject has here.
tofore been considered.
2. The Importance to the government
OF the new views of It's taxing power,
announced in the opinion of the chief
justice, can hardly be exaggerated.
First pushed to their logical conclu.-
sion, they practically exclude from the
direct operation OF the power all the
real eHtase OF the country and all it's
invested personal property. They ex-
clude Ii because, II realty and per
aonAlty are taxable only by the rule of
spportionmens, the inevitable ineouali-
lies resulting from such a plan Of taxa
ton are so gross and fragrant as to
debar any from resortipg to It. That
such inequalities must result is prac-
ticslly admitted, the only suggestion in
reply being that the power to directly
tax realty and personality WAS not meant
for use as an ordinary. every day power;
that the United States WAS expected to
rely for its customary revenues upon
duties, tmposts and excuses, and that 1t
WAS meant ID should impose direct taxes
only in extraordinary emergencies and
as sort OF dernier resort.
1t is submitted that construction OF
the constitution of such vital import.
ance In itself and requiring in it's sup
port an imputation to it's trainers of
specific purpose which nothing in the
text of the constitution has any ten
dency to reveal, can not be too carefully
considered before being finally adopted.
Second, though Of minor consequence,
1t Is certainly relevant to point out that,
II the new exposition OF the constitution
referred to is to prevail. the United
States has under previous income tax
laws collected vast sums OF money
which on every principle of justice IL
ought to refund, and which " must be
assumed that Congress will deem Itself
bound to make provision for refunding
BY appropriate legislation. Respeos.
fully submitted, RICHARD OLNEY,
Attorney General.
An Interesting Decision.