The Roanoke times. [volume] (Roanoke, Va.) 1890-1895, 1895-05-21

W nave CnnnRed HIS Opinion,
WASHINGTON, Msy 2O.-The income
tax law, which has received 80 large a
share OF the public attention since the
beginning of the first regular session OF
the Fifiy~third Congress, is q thing of
the past. After being twice heard in
the United States Supreme Court, it
was finally decided to-day by that court
to be invalid and unconstitu tional.
There were four dissenting opinions de.
livered in these cases to-day, one each
by Justices Harlan, Brown, Jackson and
White, showing that the court had stood
S to 4 against the law.
1nasmuch as one of these dissenting
opinions was handed down by Justice
Jackson and as he was absent at the
first hearing, when the court decided
evenly on the question of sustaining
the law on all points except those as to
the tax on incomes from rents and
bonds, 1t follows that ono Of the MEM
bers OF the court who at first pronounced
for the law except on these points,
changed his attitude after the second
argument. There is very little cues
ton that Justice Shiras is the momber
who revised his views of the laws. He,
however, made no announcement either
to-day or when the first opinion was
delivered as to his position.
While the opinion OF the Chief Justice
was largely review of the general as
poets of the questions involved, he based
the action OF the court to- day upon the
argument that the provisions Of the law
regarding the tax upon rents and bonds
were 80 essential factor of 1t as to rem
der all other parts of 1t dependent upon
them, and that in accordance with the
well-known rule OF law bearing on this
question the law as whole must be de-
clared invalid.
The opinion of Chief Justice, while
receiving the respectful and careful
consideration of his auditors, was not
the subject Of such general remark as
were the dissenting opinions Of Just ces
Harlan and White, which were couched
in language 80 vigorous and were SO
emphatic in their arraignment of the
majority as to cause very general com
mont. Both Justices indicated their
belief that the ruling opinion was rev.
olutionary and intimated that serious
consequences might ensue. Justice
Harlan suggested the necessity for
amending the constitution in view of
the opinion.
The courtroom was packed during the
entire three hours when the opinions
were being delivered. A large number
OF persons, including many ladies', re-
NAMED standing until the last word of
the Inst OF the dissenting opinions had
been uttered. The opinion of-the court
and the position of such of it's mem ers
had been so accurately forecasted that
no surprise was expressed In any quar-
| ter at the announcements made either
by the Chief Justice or the dissenting
| Justices.
The unexpected event of the day was
In the appearance of Justice Jackson
He had announced after casting his
vote last Saturday week that he would
return on the following Monday to Ten
nessee, but it appears that instead he
went to Philadelphia to consult a
specialist in internal diseases. He left
the bench Immediately after delivering
his opinion to-day and it Is understood
will now proceed South. He delivered
his opinion from notes.
1t should probably be stated that
while the cases in which these opinions
were delivered are uniformly character
lied as the income tax cases, they are
known on the court dockets as tho cases
of Chas. Pollock vs. the Farmers Loan
and Trust Company and Lewis 81. Hyde
vs. the Contin entail Trust Company, of
New York, both appealed from the cir
cult court for the southern district of
New York.
The conclusions of the court were as
follows: First. We adhere to the opinion
already announced that the taxes on
real estate being undisputably direct
taxes, taxes on the rents or income of
renl estate are equslly direct taxes.
Second. We are Of opinion that taxes on
personal property or on the income OF
personal property are likewise direct
taxes. Third. The tax imposed by SEQ
lions ~ to 81, inclusive. OF the act of
1894, 80 far as it falls on the income Of
real estate and on personal property,
being direct tax within the meaning
of the constitution and, therefore. un-
constitutional and void because not ap.
portioned according to presentation,
all these sections constituting one entire
scheme Of taxation are necessarily
invalid.
The DEGREES which were hereinbefore
entered in this court will be vacated !:
the DEGREES will be reversed and the
| cases remanded with iDstruc tions to
grant tho relief prayed. Sections 81 to
81 OF the tariff act OF 1894, referred to in
the conclusions of the court in the opin-
ions, are ell the sections OF the act re-
lating TO the income tax SO that the
entire income tax. law IS declared void
specifically