Evening journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1888-1932, 1895-05-21

department and assigned Go the inside
work because Of their special proficiency
in such matters so far as possible will be
assigned to other duties. It IS estimated
that the total cost of tho work already
done and to be dono IN closing up the af-
faira Of the income tax division win be
about si00. 0O0
Although the decision Of the court will
materially cut down the Anticipated reve.
nues OF the government Il Is not Thought
that it will neeessitato an extra session Of
congress unless some unlocked for con-
tinpency arises 10 make it unavoidable.
Il is Known that the administration does
not regard an extra session as necessary,
although the revenues during the last few
months have not heon at all satisfactory.
The customs receipts particularly are
surprisingly low During last january
they reached only ST., 9i6, and during
February they fell To Sl2 1888. 1870 Dur
Ing March there was on increase of about
81, 500, 000, but April showed a falling of
70 SIC. i53i 0sG During the same months
there has been q slight increase in the re-
,eip.s from internal revenue resources,
hose for April being $40, Gas. $50.
Tho deficit for the fiscal year on Jan.
81 was $34, 246 86 On Feb. this had
been increased to nearly SIS, 600, 600, and
on April 30 to about s45, $50. 600. The
deficit up to today is 5l,ol3, 584~
Chief Justice Fulier's opinion.
Chief Justice Fuller, in the course OF
his opinion, said:
The very nature Of the constitution as
observed by Chief Justice Marshall, in one
OF his greatest judgments, requires that
only its great outlines should he marked
its important objects designated and the
minor ingredients which compose those
objects he dcduced from the nature Of the
object themselves. p In considering this
question, then. we must never forget that
it is constitution that we are oxpound-
ing As heretofore stated, tie oonstitu-
ton divided federal taxation into two great
classes--the class Of direct taxes and the
class Of duties imposts and excises-and
prescribed two rules which qualified the
grant of power as 10 each class. The power
10 lay diroGt taxes npportioned among the
several states i'm proportion to their repre-
sentatlon ia tho popular branch Of con-
gress, a representation based on popula-
ton as ascortained by the census. was
plenary and absolute But to lay direct
taxes without apportionmont was forbid
den. Tho power TO lay duties imposts
and axcises was subject to the quali1oa-
tion that the imposition must be uniform
throughout the Unitod States.
We know Of no reason for holding 9TH
erwise than that the words direct taxes, -
on the one hand. and duties, imposts and
excuses, on tho other, were used in the
constitution in their natural and obvious
sense, nor in arriving at what those terms
embrace do we perceive any ground for
enlarging them beyond or narrowing them
within their natural and obvious import
at the time the constitution was framed
and ratified.
And, passing from the text we regard
the conclusion reached as inevitable when
the circumstances which surrounded the
convention and controlled its action and
the views Of those who framed and those
who adopted the constitution are consider
cd.
The chief justice next discussed the rea-
sons for tho constitutional provisions re-
gardng direct taxation. The state had
plenary powers Of taxation be said, hut
gave up the great sources Of revenue de-
rived from commerce and retained the
power Of levying taxes and duties cover
ing anything other than excuses, but in re-
spect to them the range Of taxation was
narrowed 10y the power granted to the fed
eral government over interstate commerce.
While they granted the power Of appurtion-
ing direct taxation they secured to the
states the opportunity to pay the amount
apportioned and to recoup from their own
citizens in the most feasible way.
The constitution ordained aflirmatively
| that representation and direct taxes should
DO apportioned among the several states
no direct tax should BIO laid otherwise.
The founders anticipated that the expenses
Of tho federal government would chiefly
be met by indirect taxation. They knew
that the power to tax involved the power
TO destroy The opinion continued; 1t is
said that a tax on the whole income OF
property is not direct tax, but duty.
We 40 not think so. Direct taxation was
not restricted in one breath and the re-
striotion blown to the winds in another
The chief justice said that since the
/ court had held unanimously chat the TO
ceipts from municipal bonds could not be
| taxed because the bonds were instruments
| Of the states, the same rule applies to reve
nue. from other sources not subject to ths
tax. and the lack Of power to levy any but
an apporrioned tax on real and persona
/ property equally exists as to the revenue
/ thernlrom.
The court docs not understand, it says
that the income tax has ever been regard
cd in England as other than @ direct tax
Taxation by Apportionmeut Conceded.
The power 20 tax real and personal prop
erty and the income from both, through
| apportionment, is conceded; that such
/ tax Is direct tax in the meaning Of tn
constitution has not been and, in GU
/ Judgment, cannot be successfully denied
and yet we are thus invited TO hesitate il
the enforcement of the mandate Of the con
stitution, which prohibits congress from
laying n direct tax on the revenue from
property of the citizen without regard @
state lines, and in such manner that tn
states cannot intervene by payment il
| regulation of their own resources lest
government OF delegated powers shoul
be found Go be not less powerful but les
absolute than the Imagination Of the ad
gocate had supposed
We ara not here concerned with I'll
question whether an income tax be or b
not desirable. nor whether such a tax woul
enable the government to diminish take
| on consunption and duties on imports an