Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-03-12
INCOME TAX CASES
Argument Of Ex-senator Edmunds Against
the Oonstitutionality Of the Law,
His Definition of a Direct and an In
direct Tax-His Closing Appeal
for His Clients.

In the United States Supreme Court yes
terday afternoon argument was resumed
upon the income tax cases. Assistant At
torney General Whitney concluded his
defense of the income tax.
Ex-senator George L. Edmunds then
addressed the court in behalf of the APP
pellants, against the tax.
Mr.. Edmunds said he did not think the
time had come when there should no longer
he an appeal to the courts from the acts
OF Congress. 1t would be beyond the func-
ton OF Congress to pass an act that would
strip the courts of their rights. and this
was just as true as to the rights OF the
citizens as to those of the courts.
Features of the Law Criticised.
Speaking of the income tax law he re-
ferred to the provision that the taxpayer
was required to make his returns to dep
uty collectors. He said the deputy was not
recognized as legitimate officer under
the Constitution. II do not, however," he
said, mean to dwell on that, but merely
refer TO it in passing as one of the points
Of vice which bloom In the garden of the.
last Congress" He criticised many other
features of the law providing for the col
lection of the tax and pointed out that
to the revenue officers, who, he said,
were not only the final Judges, but
the inquisitors as well. 1T is true"
he said, that these returns are to be re-
garded as confidential, but how are we to
know that they are always to be SO
treated? Is 1t not possible that they may
be handled. for instance. like the conf
dences of the United States Senator"
Mr.. Edmunds then reviewed the cases
heretofore decided, which have been re-
ferred to in the previous argument. and
analyzed the points involved at length.
He was referring to the Hilton case. in
volving this tax on carriages, when Chief
Justice Fuller called his attention to the
fact that Mr.. Hilton had an unusual num-
Unusual in number, yes" Mr.. Edmunds
asserted but he possessed them as many
persons possess virtue and grace
The True Rule of the Constitution.
He asked the court to overrule its former
decision on the income tax. as given in the
Springer case. Let u.s. he said, come
back to the true rule of the Constitution
We are to expect gradual and infinitesimal
departures from the line marked out by the
Constitution, and We may depart further
and further from 1t until at last, like the
mariner after storm, or the traveller in
the wilderness, after the stars again come
out. we are compelled to readjust :, our
He argued that the past Congress had
overstepped the limits Of the Constitution
in imposing this tax, because, he said, lit
der this law 95 per cent of the tax would
be paid by 2 per cent Of the taxable voters.
TT becomes" said Mr.. Edmunds, IAN in
teresting subject of speculation as to how
long the government can last under a sys-
tenn which allows those who pay nothing
to tax their fellow citizens. One evil step
will lead to another, as one will follow an
other, until by and by we will have revolu-
tow. h1v, 0hyy ovN6 thnvn apf 70
rule us, as the revolving changes go
round.'
Direct and an Indirect Tax.
Justice Harlan asked Mr.. Edmunds if he
had formulated q definition of the differ
ence between a direct and indirect tax and
he replied that he had. He thereupon pro-
ceeded to give it, saying that a direct tax
was a tax on any kind of property and
upon persons, not in respect of property in
existence, acquired or to be acquired, not
on calling or on the importation of goods,
but in respect to the things which belong
to the existence Of property, while an in
direct tax included all the rest. as referred
to in the Constitution under the head Of
duties. imposts and excuses. which would
be heavy or light on each person depending
upon his will.
..Do YOU not" asked Justice Brown. ire
gard a tax that is paid by person himself
as direct taxi" and Mr.. Edmunds as
sGnted.
Asked by Justice Shiras to give defini-
ton of excise he quoted Jacobs and Samuel
johnson, where the latter says 1t Is a
hateful tax" collected by "wretches."
Justice Harlan suggested that the detini-
ton would fit his CIr. Edmunds) idea of
the income tax, to which Mr.. Edmunds re-
piled that it did in part. Mr.. Edmunds
closed with plea for equality in taxation.
He declared it to be the mission of the
Supreme Court, the tribunal of last resort.
to correct such mistakes, and made last
appeal for a return to the principles OF
equality and uniform justice, even If In do
ing so it became necessary for 1t to re-