The herald., 1895-04-09
Justicc Eield,s Views

Justice Fields Views
The dissenting opinion delivered by
justice Field, the oldest member of the
court, was an exhaustive review of the
case ana the principles involved in 1t.
some decisions of the court, he said had
thrown Some doubt upon the meaning OF
ulrecF taxes, but i'll the discussions IN
Ihe h,ltish parliament the income tax
hau always been considered a direct tax
wpife the tax upon real property, its
rents and incomes, had by universal con-
sent been recognized TO be direct tax.
eJustice Field said exemptions from the
operation OF a tax always creates lnequal-
tues. Those not exempted must IN the
end bear an additional burden or pay
more than their share. a law containing
arbitrary exemptions can in no lust sense
be termed uniform. We do not thlnk
that congress has rightfully the power,
at the expense of property of like char
acter, to sustain private trading corpora
tons, such as building and loan assocla-
tlons, savings banks and mutual lie, ilre'
marine and accident insurance compa-
nies, formed under the laws of the Vari-
Gus states, which advance no national
purpose or public interest and exist only
for the pecuniary profit OF their members.
Where property is exempted from taxa
tlon, the exemption which has been Just
ly stated must be supported by some con
sideration to the public and not private
interests, will be advanced by it. Private
corporations and private enterprises can
not be aided under the pretense that 1t IS
the exercise of the discretion OF the leg
islature to exempt them.
The income tax law under consideration
is marked by discriminating features
which affect Tic whole law. 1t discrmi-
mates between those who receive an IN
come of $1,000 and those who do not. 1t
thus vitiates. III my judgment. by this
arbitrary discrimination, the whole legis-
lation. The legislation i'll the dlscfimlna-
tion it makes is class legislation When
ever distinction is made in the burdens
a law imposes or if it confeTs on any
citizen by any reason OF their birth,
wealth. or religion, it is class legislation
and leads inevitably to oppression and
abuse and to general unrest and disturb
ance in society. 1t. is hoped and believed
that the great amendments to the coustl-
tuition which followed the late civil war
had rendered such legislation impossible
for all future time. But the Objectionable
legislation reappears in the act under
consideration. 1t is the same i'll essential
character as the English statute of 1851,
which taxed Protestants at a certain rate,
Catholics as Il class at double the rate OF
Protestants, and Jews at another and
separate rate.
The law of 1894 says there shall be as
sessed levied and collected, Except as
herein otherwise provided. per centum
of the amount. If the exceptions are
stricken out there is nothing to be as
sessed and collected except what congress
has otherwise atfirmatively ordered.
Nothing less can have the force of law.
This court is impotent to pass any law ON
the subject. 1t has not legislative power.
The law of congress is also invalid in
that it authorizes Il tax upon the salaries
of the Judges of the courts of the United
States against the declaration of the
constitution that their compensation
shall not be dim finished during their con-
tinuance in Office.
In conclusion Justice Field said; Here
| close my opinion. | could not say in
view of questions of such gravity that go
down TO the very foundation OF the ques
ton. If the provisions of the constitu
tion can be set aside by an act of congress,
where is the course OF usurpatiou to end?
"The present assault upon capital is but
the beginning. 1t will be the stepping
stone to others larger and more sweeping,
until our political contests will become
war of the poor against the rich; war
constantly growing in intensity and bit
terness.
If the court sanctions the power of
discriminating taxation and nullifies the
uniformity mandate OF the constitution,
as said by one who has been all his life
a student of our institutions, ii Will mark
the hour when the sure decadence of our
political government viii. commence.
If the purely arbitrary limit OF $1,000
in the present law can be sustained none
having less than that amount OF property
being assessed or taxed for the support of
the government, the limitation OF future
congresses may be fixed at a much larger
sum-at five or ten or twenty thousand
dollars. Parties possessing that amount |
alone being compelled to bear the burdens |
OF our government or the limitation |
may be designated at such amount as a
board Of walking delegates may deem
necessary. There is no safety in allowing |
the limitation to be adjusted unless in |
strict compliance with the mandates of
the constitution, which requires taxa
ton to be uniform in operation, and, so !
far as practical, in proportion to their
property, equal upon all citizens
'Unless the rule of the constitution
govern, a majority may fix the limita-
tions at such a rate as will not include |
any of their own number.
Il am of the opionion that the VIII Die |
law of 1894 should be declared void and !
without binding force-that part which |
relates to the tax on rents, profits and |
income from real estate that Is, so much |
as constitutes the .uirect tax because not
imposed by the rule of apportionment ac
cording the representation of the states as
prescribed by the constitutiOn-and that
part which imposes a tax upon the bonds
and securities of the several states and
upon the bonds and securities of their
municipalities, as being beyond the power
of congress to impose and the law as far
as 1t imposes duties, imposts and eXciscs,
as void in not providing for the uni
formity required by the constitution III
such cases.