The Kootenai herald. [volume] (Kootenai, Idaho) 1891-1904, 1895-05-11
Olney Explains the Law to the
U. S. Supreme Court.
ACCORDING TO HIS OWN IDEAS
MT Choate Endeavors 10 Shatter the
Governments Side of the In.
come Tax Case.


of an argument for reversal of the for
mer opinion of the court on the ques-
ton of the validity of the federal tax
on incomes derived from rents. All the
seats on the bench were again occupied
today, as yesterday. and visitors crowd
ed the courtroom
Whitney said his historical brief.
which he had promised yesterday. had
not reached him from the printer, but
ne had already gone almost as far into
the question as he should in quoting
English proceedings orally and giving
FACTS as TO the meaning of various
words and phrases used in the taxation
laws. lie said his statement of facts
would be his principal argument and he
believed that in a case of the character
or the income tax case facts were the
best argument that could be made He
claimed the weight of the evidence was
to the following account: First the word
duty had legal definition. The
phrase direct tax had none. but was
borrowed from political economy. Sec
ond, specific personal property tax. spe-
cifc real property tax and specific in
come tax We're each a duty within the
meaning of the constitution 4 gener-
al tax on all personal property at valu-
~NAOAA was AAOb a OubNf lIl1OSl OF tAclSc
at all, nor was it a direct tax in polit-
zeal economy. Third, a specific real
property tax would probably have been
considered an indirect tax. Fourth, a
general income tax, properly so called,
was unknown at the time Of the consti-
ton, but was a duty within the mean
ing. Fifth, specific personal property
tax and specific income tax was duty
and not direct tax.
Mr.. Olney followed MI Whitney and
said, in part: THE taxpayer pays this
year according to his money-spending
ability of last year, and it is entirely
conceivable that a man who this year
does not earn a cent and is without a
cents worth of property, real or per
sonal. may, nevertheless. be assessed on
hundreds or thousands of dollars of in
come actually received by him last year.
Yet this is the sort OF tax which is called
a tax on real estate, for no other reason
than that last years rents form part of
the yard-stick by which this years mon
ey-spending capacity is measured A
greater error, submit, could not easily
be committed. If the distinction be
tween personality and realty in the mat
ter OF taxation is made by the cOnstitu-
ton itself, ard that it is a necessary as
sumption of the argument, where does
this court get the authority to set it
aside as a matter of form? No such au-
thority exists.
1T is minated that logically speak
ing, if tax on real estate is a direct
tax, so is a tax on personal property;
and that if a tax on rents is tax on
real estate, so is a tax on interest and
dividends a tax on the capital produc-
ing them. | leave the case to the court
therefore. at this point, feeling sure Of
this at least-that if any consideration
which could help save the government.
the integrity of one of its most import
ant powers has failed to be developed.
The failure can not be attributed to
any want of appreciation of the case.
nor any intention not to give to it the
most careful attention and study"
CHOATE'S ADDRESS.
Mr. Olney concluded at $40 and was
Immediately followed by Mr. Choate.
who began the concluding argument for
the appellants in the case. Mr.. Choates
manner of introducing his remarks was
the middle of a sentence, or as if he in
tended to complete a sentence, begun
and unfinished by either Olney or Whit
ney.
But" said he, IF the court please,
not engaged in "a Incorporating per-
Torrance. Nor are we a political as
sembly, as Mr.. Whitney seemed to
think, in whose presence his chief Ont.
Olney) might be proceeding for an
amendment of the constitution to get
rid Of what he calls this effete doctrine
of apportiOnment.
''Why is it," he asked, that the coun-
try is holding it's breath for the decis-
ion on the second hearing of this case?
Why are the people from end to end of
the country so eager to hear the definite
and let us hope the final verdict in the
case? The reason is found in the fact
that the entire country is deeply con-
cerned to know whether the safeguards
which had been so dearly purchased
nv our fathers were to be preserved to
the present or future generations or to
be trampled under foot and denied to
u.s.
Choate then began his real argument,
saying as far as practicable he would
take UP the question where II has been
left off by the former decision. He
would regard it as settled and fixed that
incomes from principal and state bonds
could not be taxed. He ridiculed the
nosition Of the government that a tax
on rents was not tax on land. The
decision already rendered met this OBJ
lection completely. A most careful
brief had been filed on the question OF
direct taxation. The government had
made the best answer it could, and that
answer was not much, and Mr.. Choate
/ added: what is Mr. Whitney's idea
of direct tax? Obviously, he has none
He said there was no such thing. Du-