The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-04-16
AN INJUNCTION SERVED.
A Number of Serious ConSti-
tutional Questions to Be
Decided at Once.
ENTIRE ACT MAY BE INVALID.
The Matter Has Now Been Brought
Into Court for Decisive
Action.

CHICAGO, ILL, April 15.-In the United
States Court to-day Judge Showalter en-
joined Siegel, Cooper & Co. from making
returns to the Internal Revenue Collector
under provisions of the Income Tax law.
The restraining order was granted on
bill which attacks the law, and under the
order the Government was compelled to
take part in the proceedings to defend the
operation of the law.
The petition sets forth the imperative
need of a final determination by full
bench of the questions in which the court
was equally divided Dissatisfaction with
the decision of the court seems to be gen.
eral and it is believed that the administra-
ton will do all in its power to secure a
hearing on the case. The Government,
however, will not consent to reargument
of any particular question involved, but
will insist if rehearing is granted that the
whole case be reargued. The only point
decided by the court which meets with the
approval of the Government is the exempt
ing from the tax incomes from State and
municipal bonds. The rent exemption is
vigorously attacked and the contention is
made that if the late decision stands per-
sons who paid the $4,000, 900 collected dur
ing the war on incomes on rent have at
least an equitable claim against the Gov
eminent for its restitution.
The petition for rehearing sets forth that
while the court has decided two points of
the law, as to rents and municipal bonds,
yet no Judgment has been announced au-
thoritatively establishing any principle for
interpreting the act on the following three
points:
First-Whether the void provisions in
validate the whole section.
Second-Whether as to the income from
personal property as such the act is I'M
constitutional as levying direct taxes.
Third-Whether any part of the tax, if
not considered as direct tax, is invalid
for want of uniformity.
The petition continues: The appellants
may well urge that these serious constitu-
tional questions should be finally decided
before their trustee expends their funds in
voluntary payment of the tax. In addi-
ton it is manifest that until decision is
reached the courts will be overwhelmed
with Itigations upon these questions, and
the payment and collection of the tax will
be most seriously embarrassed.
In conclusion the petition asks that the
cases be restored to the docket for reargu-
ment on the question upon which the con-
test was evenly decided. In case this is
denied, the petition asks that the court
below may be directed to determine:
First, whether or not the invalidity of
the statute in the respects already specified
renders the same altogether invalid and
cooOnA hot 80 = ~ =
tional in the respects not decided by this
court.
WASHINGTON, D. c., April 15.-Attor-
ney-General Olney and ex-senator Ed
munds were in court in the interest of the
Government and the appellants respect
lively. 1t is generally believed about the
court that its decision on the petition will
not be announced until next Monday.