The Wichita daily eagle., 1895-05-21
DECLARED NO LAW
Continued From Second Page)

:ever contemplated anything as a direct
tax, but that laid directly upon property
Itself according TO valuation of assess
ment. No intention could be attributed
to the trainers of the constitution TO
make any tax a direct tax which 1t
was possible to apportion. If a tax
could not be apportioned among several
states with reasonable approximation
20 equality 10 all citizens of the country,
that should be evidence that il was not
dlrect tax within the meaning OF the
constitution. What is to be the end of
the application Of this rule, this new
rule adopted by the court n tax is
iald by the general government against
all the money on hand or on deposit
upon every citizen Of the country at a
given rate
BURDENS FOR THE WEAKEST
When laid few parties come before
the court and said: My deposits were
derived from the proceeds of farm pro-
ducts, or from the interest on bonds
and securities and they are not there
fore taxable by this law In my
judgment the principle announced in
this decision practically destroys the
power Of the government TO distinguish
incomes from the source of them. There
is no real difference between changing
the existence OF the power to tax
incomes from real and personal es-
tates and attaching such conditions
and requirements to its exercise as will
render it impossible or incapable of
any practical operation. You Nigh {
Just we'll strike at the power TO
reach incomes from the sources indi-
Gated IS to attack these conditions of
approtionment which no legislature
can undertake to adopt and which can
not be enforced with any degree of
equality or fairness betwene the COM
n fzaN, z.f
The practical operation of the decis-
ION Is not only to disregard the great
principles of equality in taxation, but
the further principle that in the i'm
position of taxes the burdens would be
imposed upon those having the most
aolllty TO bear them. This decision
works out directly opposite result, in
renewing the citizens having the great
er ability, while the burdens of taxation
are made to fall most heavily and op-
pressively upon those having the least
ahlllty. Considered in all its bearings
the decision is the most disastrous blow
ever struck at the constitutional power
OF congress. 1t strikes down an i'm
portant portion of the most vital and
essential power of the government in
practically excluding any recourse to
incomes from personal and real estate
Tor the purpose Of raising needed rev.
enue to meet the governments wants
ana necessities under any circumstance
JUSTICE BROWN DISSENTS.
Justice Brown in his dissent said that
If the question. What is and what is not
direct tax? We're now for the first time
presented, he should entertain a grave
duobt whether, in view of the defini-
ton Of direct tax given by the courts
and writers on political economy dur
ing the present century. il ought not to
be held to apply not only to an income
tax but to every tax, the burden of
which is borne both Immediately and
ultimately by the person paying il. He
regards II as very clear that the clause
requiring direct taxation to be appor-
toned as 10 the population has no ap-
plication to taxes which are not capa-
hle of apportionment according to pop
u!atfon. II could not be supposed that
the constitution could have contemplat-
ed practical inhibition upon the power
OF congress to tax in some way all tax
able property within the jurisdiction Of
the federal government for the purpose
of a national revenue.
Justice Brown said in conclusion:
Respect for the constitution will not
be INSPIRED by a narrow and technical
construction which shall limit the nee
esSary powers of congress. The deciS-
lon involves nothing less than the sur
render OF the taxing power to the mon
II L
congress viii find some means of sur
mPuntinS the present crisis, my fear is
that i'm some moment of national peril
this discussion Will rise up 10 Illustrate
sts will and paralyze its arm. | hope
fthat II may not prove the first step
toward the submergence Of the liber-
ties of the people in a sordid despotism
Of wealth.
JUSTICE WHITE CLOSES.
Justice White stated his views brief
" From first to last. he said. the
opinion Of the ma jority was but a series
of contradictory propositions. one eat
ing up and destroying the others.
Speaking of the grounds upon which
he dissented. Mr.. White laid great
stress upon the Hylton case, and re-
enunciated the legal points he had
made in his first decision in the case
in concluding his opinion he said,
THE injustice Of the conclusion
points to the error of adopting it. 1t
takes invested wealth and reads il into
the constitution as favored and pro-
tected class of property, whilst the oc-
cupation of the minister the doctor,
the professor. the lawyer. the inventor,
the author. the merchant and all vari-
Gus forms of human activity upon
which the prosperity of people must
depend. subject 10 taxation without
apportionment The absolute inequal-
ity and injustice Of taxing by reference
to population and without regard to
the amount Of the wealth taxed is 81
manifest that to admit the power to
tax and limit TO this mode. SubStan-
TALLY denies the power itself. since it
imposes restriction which renders its
exercise practically impossible"
\ few eXtemnOraneouS remarks were
made by Justice White after the read |
ing of bis opinion. He spoke of the |
decision a s a blow struck at the Amer I
lean people and said the power Of levy |
ing sn income tax now left could only
be exercised with such injustice that |
no legislative body would dare attempt |
10 exercise il, for such an attempt |
would bring forward a bloody revolu- |
tiCn.
Strong nerves depend upon pure. rich /
red blood. Hoods Sarsaparilla is the |
only true blood purifier.