The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-05-08

most as far into the question as he
should, in quoting English presidents
orally and giving facts as to the mean
ing of various words and phrases used
in taxation. He said his statement
of facts would be his principal argu-
mant and he believed that in a case
of the character of the income tax
cases, facts were the Heterogeneous
that could be made. He claimed the
weight of evidence was to the follow
ing account:
First-The word duty had a legal
definition. The phrase 'direct tax"
had none, but was borrowed from
political economy.
Second-A specific personal tax.
specific real property tax and specific
income tax were each duty within
the meaning of the constitution. The
general tax on all personal property
at a valuation was not a duty impost
or excise a" all; nor was 1t direct
tax in political economy.
Third-A general income tax would
probably have been considered an indi-
rect tax.
Fourth--A general income tax, prop
erly so-cEllled, was unknown at the
time of the constitution but was
duty within its meaning.
F'ifth-A specific personal property or
specific income tax was duty, and
not a direct tax.
at the Time of the Revolution.
Taking I'D the American system OF
.axation at the time of the revolution,
Mr. Whitney said it was devoid of
Uniformity, and very difficult Of classi-
Ication It could only be shown thor
0ughly by going through the statutes
of the thirteen states, as he had gone
through those of Great Britain. He
quoted frequently from the report or
Secretary of the Treasury Wolcott.
made in 1885, in which that official
states that the system was entirely
different in various states and some
OF the states were almost without any
form whatever In North Carolina,
for instance, lands were taxed uni
-ornlly. in South Carolina by districts
and in Virginia by a classification OF
countries. He directed especial men
ton to Wolcott's report, saying that
his explanation was clear and while
he did not use the term direct taxes"
IN the legal m Gaming, he gave 1t the
meaning of the political economists.
He said there had been no income
tax in any Of the states prior to the
convention unless il was in Delaware,
ara concerning that state there was
apparently doubt. The system in use
IN most of the states was that OF rat
ing land for ta1 purposes at an annual
valuation. Summing it up, he said
the main result Of the examination OF
the system in the various states had
been negative in character, and had
shown first that the systems were so
different that it was hard to determine
now they did pay their taxes ana
secondly, that there was no sett!eo
meaning to the word duty" the
At ~ piaa0 and
an excise at another.
On All Property.
Mr.. Whitney argued at great length
to show that the present income Tax
Is not a tax i'm posed on land nor on
rents, because they are derived from
land. but on property of all kinds, ad-
cruing 20 the owner within the year
irrespective of It's source.
In the question Of uniformity, he
said he had nothing to offer that had
not been given in the original hearing,
but he repeated some OF those for the
pllrpose, as he said, of setting the op,
posing side right as to the position of
The government
Mr.. Whitney commended against the
theory of personal uniformity as In
tended by the constitution He argued
that so far a s corporations are con-
cerned, the theory of individual uni
In estimating the profits of an indi-
vtdnal, no account was taken of his
time; ne did not pay himself for
managing his own business; yet cor
porations paid salaries to their officers
Tor managing the business. In con-
sfdering the matter of fairness of the
exemption of incomes below 1000 Mr..
whitney asserted that the court had
never assumed to declare that Congress
had in any case exercised its discretion
in any matter unreasonable and IN
timated that 1t never would go that
length.
II appeared to be the undercurrent
of Mr.. Whitney's remarks that the
government did not contend that the
exemptions of certain classes of cor
portations were just. He referred to the
authorities. however, to show that the
supreme court had held that individual
corporations might be exempted by
name even from taxation.
OIney Follows.
Mr.. Whitney finished at $50 with