Elmore bulletin. [volume] (Rocky Bar, Idaho) 1889-1906, 1895-05-25
INCOME TAX Is VOID
The Law in Whole and in Part Is
Unconstitutional.
THE OPINION READ BY FULLER
fohf pissenting opinions-Justiees Har.
Ian and White Severely Con.
demn the Findings

Washington. May 20.-The income tax
law which has received SO large a
share OF the public attention since the
beginning OF the FIRST regular session
OF the Ftfty-third congress. is a thing of
the past After being twice heard I'm
the United States supreme court. n
was finally decided today 10 be valid
and unconstitutional. There were four
dissenting opinions delivered. There is
very little question that Justice Shiras
is the justice who changed his views
on these points. While the opinion of
the chief justice was largely a review
OF the general aspects OF the questions
involved, he based the opinion of the
court today upon the argument that
the provisions OF the law regarding
the tax on rents and bonds were so es-
sentiaily a factor OF IL as TO render all
other parts OF IL dependent on them.
ana In accordance with the weIl-known
rule OF law bearing on this question. the
law as whole, must be declared In
valid.
The opinions OF Justice Harlan and
White We're concluded in language 80
vigorous and were so emphatic In their
arraignment OF the majority as TO
cause very general comment. Justice
Harlan suggested the necessity for
amending the constitution in view OF
the opinion.
There was the usual throng about the
United States supreme courtroom in
anticipation OF a final decision OF the in
come tax cases. The justices were at
the capitol early and consultation be-
gan promptly at 10 o'clock. continuing
until a few minutes before L. All the
members of the court were present, in
cluding Justice jackson, \, nose presence
caused great deal OF speculation and
was the basis for a deal Of gossip as
TO the possibilities of some sort of a
surprise for the public The justices
against the law were Chief Justice
Fuller; Justices Gray. Field. Brewer and
Shtras. For the law Justices Harlan.
White, Brown and Jackson.
FuLLER's OPINION.
The conclusions OF the court were as
follows:
''F'irst-we adhere to the opinion al
ready announced. that taxes on real es-
tate being indisputably direct taxes.
taxes on rents or incomes from real es-
tate are equally direct taxes
'.second-we are equally of the opin-
ion that taxes on personal property or
on the income from personal property
are likewise direct taxes
''Third-The tax imposed by sections
q to 81 inclusive, OF the act OF lS9i. so
far as IL falls on the income from real
estate and on personal property. being
a direct tax within the meaning OF the
and therefore unconstitu-
tional and void. because net proper
toned according to representation. all
these sections constituting the entire
scheme of taxation are necessarily in
valid. The DEGREES below will be re-
versed and the cases remanded with in
structions to grant the relief prayed"
Sections q to 81 Of the tariff act OF |
1894. referred TO in the conclusions OF |
the court in the opinions. are the sec |
lions of the act relating to the income 1
tax. SO that the entire income tax Law is |
declared void specifically.
At the outset OF his opinion Justice |
Fuller said: whenever this court IS re-
luired to pass upon the validity OF an
lct of congress as tested by fundament-
II laws enacted by the people the duty |
imposed demands In its discharge the
Utmost deliberation and care and In
lokes the deepest responsibility; and /
his is especially so when the question
involves the exercise OF great govern
mental power and brings into considera-
ion as vitality affected by the decision.
hat complex system OF government so
agaciously framed TO secure and per-
indestruction OF union com
'osed OF indestructible states. We have
therefore, an anxious desire TO omit
lothing which In any degree may tend
o elucldate the questions submitted
nd. aided by further able arguments
mbodying the fruits OF elaborate re-
earch. have carefully re-examined |
hese cases with the result that. while
ur former conclusions remain un-
their scope must be enlarged |
" the acceptance of their logical con-
equences. Our previous decision was
onfined to consideration OF the validity |
Il the tax on incomes from real estate |
nd on incomes from municipal bonds. |
rhe question thus limited was whether |
uch taxation was direct or not, In the |
meaning of the constitution, and the |
,ourt went no further as to the tax on |
Incomes from real estate than 10 hold |
hat II fell within the same class. as the |
ource from whence income was derived. |
hat is that the tax upon realty and the |
ax upon receipts tnerefrom were ulike |
iirect while as to the income from mu-
iicipal bonds. that could not be taxed, |
because OF want OF power 10 tax the |
'ource. and no reference was made To |
he nature OF the tax as being direct or |
Indirect.
I'VE are now permitted so broaden our
held of inquiry and determine to which
,f the two great classes Of tax per
sons entire income. whether derived
rom rents or products or otherwise
from real estate. or from bonds. stocks
lr other forms Of pesonal property. be-
ongs. and we are unable TO conclude
that enforced subtraction from the ef-
feet OF the law all of an owners real or
property in the manner pre-
seribed is so different from tax upon
the property itself that II is not d.
rect but an indirect tax In the meaning