New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-03-14
CHOATE'S FINAL ARG UMENT.
THE NETWORK LAWYER CLOSES THE
CASE AGAINST THE INCOME TAX.

MAKERS-THE COURTROOM CROWDED
nY INTERESTED AUDITORS
Washington March l3-'rhe argument in the in
come tax cases which has been in progress before
the Supreme Court Of the United States since last
THURSDAY. was closed to-day in a speech of three
hours. delivered by Joseph H. Choate' OF New
York in support Of the contention that the pro-
visions OF the law are unconstitutional
The interest in the argument has grown day py
6ay as manifested by the extent ana eaSerness
OF the througs that have gathered. and Il yea ched
a climax TODAY with the close of the argument
Long before the hour OF opening the court the
corridors leading to the chamber were fiieG win
crowds anxious TO gain admttance but not half OF
them reached the desired goal When Mr.. Choa'e
began, at u o'clock, the continuation OF MS re-
marks begun yesterday afternoon. he spoke IN the
nresence of an audience that would have ne a
compliment to any orator in the land. BESIDES Ine
counsel engaged in the case. ana the members
Of Congress who had previously been in ATTENDANCE
upon the argument there were present ex-Speaher
Reed who sat beside Mr.. Springer; Represeh
tive Cousins OF Iowa; Senator Mitchell OF oregon
Senator Cullom of Illinois; Senior Cana. Chilian
Minister and Anibal Cruz, his Secretary OF Lesl-
ton and a large number OF ladies'
There was no delay from preliminary proceed
tngs and as the court was declared open
Mr. Choate began his speech He said that when
he closed yesterday he was pointing out the ample
means Of indirect taxes open to the Government
10 be applied under the rule OF apportonment IN
equality and uniformity. without resortng to direct
taxes and yet that under that system or taxes, as
a last resort. the entire property OF the people OF
the United States open TO Congress Tor the
welfare and defence of the Government He called
attention 10 the distribution OF the power of taxa
.ion and the limitations of the exercise Of that
power from the operation of which it could not by
any device, escape. Mr.. Choate said ne ala hot
impute to constitutional convention such needless
ness or ignorance as was suggested in one OF 'he
briefs on the other side; that II did not believe ana
understand that 1t covered the whole subject OF
taxation by it's declarations with respect OF dlrect
taxes imports excuses and duties.
Coming 10 the argument of the propositions he
had advanced, Mr.. Choate asked: How about the
corpus of personal property If tax upon II
was neither a direct tax nor an import or excise
or a duty, what would follow? Just that which
Chief Justice Chase said would apply 100 years
apo-that II was a tax to be enforced by Congress
and laid neither according TO apportionment nor OF
equality and uniformity And yet IN all tha' II"
years nobody had even suggested that such IAN
could be so enforced and collected.
The true rule of construction. Mr. Choate said.
was TO impute TO the work Of the Constitutional
Convention the same Interpretation that everybody
else gave to 1t at the time and had ever since gwen
f. Mr. Wadleigh. OF NewHampshre. had the true
idea when he said discussing the operation OF the
taxing clause, that it would bear hardly upon MS
State but that New Hampshire would consent 70 IL
IN order to have the Constitution adopted why
should 1t bear hardly upon New-Hampshire' win
its mountains and rocky hlllsdes. were not that
all taxes except duties imports and excuses shouio
te apportioned according TO population?
Mr. Choate asserted that the tax upon real estate
the rents and incomes therefrom. was direct TAX
and that the members Of the Constitutional con-
yention had them in mind as subject OF direct tax
when they used that term He took that. he said
hat hah
Patterson anybody else in an effort 20 limit or
prescribe the meaning OF the Constitution. but from
the generally and universally acknowledged consent
of mankind then and now. There had peeh 'hree
periods OF direct taxation-in l7H. when trouoie
with France apprehended; during the war OF
1872, and In the War of the Rebellion Inc hrst
was emblematic OF them all-it was direct tax
upon real estate not naked land as Mr.. Carter
had contended. but upon houses and lands. pro-
ductive and unproductive alike
The second proposition which Mr. Choate ad-
vanced was that tax upon rents from real estate
was indistnguishable from tax on the real prop
erty itself He had understood the learned At
General yesterday TO say no. that rent after
1t go; into mans pocket. was money and that
I, was that which was taxed. The law proposed
70 tax rents personal property and not as real
estate. But how could any one pay the tax upon
land-Mr Choate put the question, he SAID as ap-
piled to the practical ordinary business affairs OF
'"''N
edge-except as he paid It from the rentals? The
owner could not take piece of the land and give IT
10 the Government as equivalent for the tax
"Is there any difference. then, he asked De
tween a tax on land and tax on the rents there
FROM" An unapportioned tax upon real estate
Mr.. Choate said the Constitution Forbade couid
such a tax be laid upon the rents or income
thereof? No one would say that such law could
he maintained tax upon land being forbidden,
Congress could not wipe out the value OF the iahd
by a tax upon the income therefrom for a period
OF years. 1--WE have been lawyers all our lives
said Mr. Choate. land have followed scores OF gen
erations in considering the difference between land
and the rent or profit thereon. We have found II 70
be an Intangible and insensible thing"
Illustrating this. ne quoted Coke upon l1tteton
which he said had been the law In all English
Christendom ever since, that when landowner
grants the profits OF his lands TO another the fee
10 the land Itself passes for what - land but the
proft thereon? The Attorney-General had said that
the law taxed rents personal property and not
as rents II that were so. IT would still need 10
be apportioned among the States according 20 pop
ulation TO be effective; but the law assessed tax
on rents as such and not personal property. He
quoted numerous decisions by the Supreme Court
or the United States itself that a tax upon the
profits arising from a certain business or thing was
4 tax upon the business or thing itself. Therefore
he said he submitted the proposition, although with
dfndence because It had been 80 stoutly contested
by his learned adversaries, that tax upon rents
"a q tax upon land and required by the same law
and the same Constitution u be apporiloned among
the States according TO population TO be effective
And so as to personal property. Mr.. Choate con-
tended that tax upon It was included WITHIN the
term Of direct taxes and valid only wheh app"r
toned among the States.
oSunnose a man" said Mr. Choate assessed on
his personal property under a tax apportioned
among the States, should refuse to pay on the
ground that it was excise tax, duty, and APP
pealed TO the courts for relief. Would any court
grant It? Not at all"
The tax on interest OF United States bonds, Mr..
Choate said was a tax the bond Itself. az IN
the case OF rents and therefore could not be legally
collected. The interest bond issued by the
United States or any other body polite, he said.
was q part OF the bond itself and inseparable from
Il. what value 10 me-" he asked. 'is a bond Of
the United States payable thirty years hence bur