St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-04-26
FURTHER TAX TALK
Question of Constitutionality
Of the Law to Be Re-
argued.
COURTS ORDER PERVERTED
May 6 Set as Date for Com
mencement Of Final
Disposition.
COURTS ORDER PERVERTED
JUSTICE JACKSON'S HEALTH
Thought to Have Had Some
Bearing on Original
Order.

WASHINGTON, April 25.-When
the United States supreme court, on
May 6, again takes up the income
tax question, it will once more go
into the merits of all the points in
VOWED, and will not, as its order
tlade Tuesday apparently stated,
cpnfine the arguments to the queS-
( ton whether or not a rehearing of
the cases shall be granted. This I'M
expected explanation of the courts
order shows that what it intended
to state in its ambiguous announce
ment was that it had granted the
petition for a rehearing, and if the
bench was full on the date named
would reopen the cases on May 6.
This order of the court, it is stated,
was drawn hastily, and it was not
noticed at the time that it was am
biguous, and apparently justified
the conclusion that the court had de-
cided simply to hear argument on
the question of granting a rehear-
ing. Attorney General Olney and 9th
ers understood the courts order In
the same manner as did the public
The attorney general. however, was
at some loss to understand just the
extent to which the court de-
sired him to go in his argu-
ment. In reopening the cases the
court, it is stated, will not vacate
the order it has made already, but
will let its decision stand for the
present, and will only
MODIFY THE ORIGINAL
entry in the event that, as a result
OF the reargument, a majority of
the court decides to overrule the con-
clusions heretofore reached. The COM
plete reopening of the cases will ne
cessitate continuous and hard work
on the part of counsel so as to be
prepared for the court. Attorney Cen
eral Olney and counsel for the gov
eminent on this occasion will go most
fully and deliberately into the points
involved, and especially into the
question of direct taxation The gov
eminent will represent that the i'm
portance of the case, in the light of
the views expressed by the court in
q.
make 1t desirable that week should
be allowed for argument on each
side. If allowed, the argument In the
matter of length may bear some
comparison to the exhaustive hear
ing before the Paris arbitration tri-
bunal on the Bering sea question
taThe- explanation now given. unoffi-
cially, at the court of the meaning
OF its order indicates a probability
that before final adjournment of the
court for the present term a final
aetermlnation of the full court on the
mooted income tax question NAV be
expected While it is the purpose of
the supreme court to have the
WHOLE CASE REARGUED
and the merits gone into at full
length in order that final disposi-
ton of the question may speedily be
reached, yet there is good reason to
DeIleve that the Vagueness of its
recent order was due to some doubts
sui remaining as to the condition of
justice JackSon's health. The action
OF the court in fixing upon MAY 6
Tor the beginning of the reargument
was something of a surprise to the
OFFICIALS of the department of justice.
While, as matter of course. the
government will be as ready on that
day as is possible in the very limited
tune given for preparation, yet 1t IS
realized that it will be extremely diff
ncuit to do in eight days the work
which rightfully calls for a months
close application.