The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1895-05-20
IT IS VOID IN TOTO
Whole Income Tax Law De-
clared Unconstitutional.
The Decision Read Today by
Chief Justice Fuller.
TAXES ARE DIRECT.
These Are Invalid Therefore the
Whole Law Is.
The Vote Stood Five to Four
Against the Law.
TAXES ARE DIRECT.

WAsHIxGToN, May 2O.-The income
tax was today declared unconstitutional
in toto by the supreme court of the
United States.
Immediately on the conveniGg OF the
supreme court Chief Justice Fuller read
the opinion The fact that he read it
was generally accepted as conclusive
that the whole law would be knocked
out. The conclusions of the court were
as follows:
"First-We adhere to the opinion al
ready announced. that taxes on real
estate being indisputably direct taxes,
taxes on the rents or income of real
estate are equally direct taxes
"Second-We are of the opinion that
taxes on personal property or on the in
come of the personal property are like
wise direct taxes.
"Third-The tax imposed by sections
27 to 81 inclusive, of the act of 1894, SO
far as it falls on the income of real es-
tate and on personal property being a
direct tax within the meaning of the con-
stitution and therefore unconstitutional
and void because not appOrtOned ac-
cording to representation, all those sec
tions constituting one entire scheme of
taxation, are necessarily void
The DEGREES hereinbefOre entered in
this court will be vacated. The DEGREES
below will be reversed and the cases re-
manded, with instructions to grant the
relief prayed"
Sections 27 to 81 of the tariff act of
1894, referred to in the conclusions of
the court in the opinions, are all the sec
lions of the act relating to the income
tax, SO that the entire income tax law is
declared void specifically.
rnfo tod,
Five against the constitutionality of the
law, to four for the law. Those against
the law were Chief Justice Fuller and
Justices Field, Gray, Brewer and Shiras.
For the law, Justices Harlan, White,
Brown and Jackson.
The opinion, as it touches upon differ
ent points which were raised, says:
"The constitution divided federal taxa
tion into two great classes, the class of
direct taxes and the class of duties, i'm
posts and excises, and prescribe two
rules which qualified the grant OF
power as to each class. The power
to lay direct taxes, apportioned among
the several states in proportion to their
representation in the popular branch of
congress, a presentation based on pop
ulation as ascertained by the census, was
plenary and absolute, but to lay direct
taxes without apportionment was for
bidden. The power to lay duties, i'm
posts and excises was subject to the quail
itication that the i'm position must be uni
form throughout the United States
sour previous decision was confined
to the consideration of the validity of the
tax in the income from real estate and
on the income from municipal bonds
1--WE are now permitted to broaden the
field of inquiry and determine to which
of the two great classes a tax upon a
persons entire income, whether derived
from rents or products, or otherwise, oil
real estate or from bonds, stocks, or other
forms of personal property be
longs; and we are unable to con
clude that the enforced subtraction
from the yield of all the owners of real
or personal property in the manner pre-.
scribed, is so different from a tax upon
the property itself, that it is not a direci
but an indirect tax in the meaning of the
constitution The words of the constitu-
tion are to be taken in their obvious
sense and to have reasonable construc-
ton"
The opinion continues: sit is said
that tax on the whole income of prop
erty is not direct tax, but a duty. We
do not think SO. Direct taxation was not
restricted into ono breath and restriction
blown to the winds in another"
The opinion next took up the argu
ment that tax on property is not q di-
rect tax within the meaning of the con.
stltution and on this point it says
"Ihe constitution prohibits any direc
tax unless IN proportion to mum
bers, as ascertained by the census
and in the light of the circumstances u
which we have referred it is not an eva
sion OF that prohibition to hold that ,
general unapportioned tax imposed upor
all property owners as a body for or il
respect to their property is not direc
In the meaning of the constitution, be
cause confined to the income therefrom
The constitution does not say that
direct tax shall be laid by apportion
ment on any property than land; on tht
contrary it fOrbids all unapportioned di
rect taxes; and we know of no warrant fo
excepting personal property from the ex
erclse of power, or any reason why an an
portloned direct tax cannot be laid an,
assessed as Mr.. Gallatin said in his re
port when secretary OF treasury in 1912
internal Revenue Commissioner Mile
has telegraphed all collectors of in
ternal revenue to forward at ono
to his office all income ia
returns and everything else pei
tanning to the tax. Up to this tim
there has been collected about $4,000
under the income tax law which was tc
udy ueclareu unconstitutional
1t Is almost certain that Internal Rev
enue Commissioner Miller, as soon a
he is officially informed of th
courts decision, will take ster
to refund all the collections. III
internal revenue laws give th
commissioner specific en+borit
to refund all moneys illegally or wrong
fully collected by him, aud there seen
to be no doubt that this authority cove
%Ae income tax case.