The herald., 1895-05-22
Tnn DEMISE OF THE INCOME TAX

"And in the case before us tnere Is no
nuestion "A TO the validity OF this act, ex-
cent sections q to 81 inclusive which re-
late IN the subject which has been under
discussion. and as to them we think the
rule laid down by Chief Justice shaw In
Warren vs.. Charleston is applicable; that
if the different parts are so mutualy con-
nected with and dependent on each otner
as conditions. considerations or compen-
sations for each other as to warrant be-
lief that the legislature intended them as
a whole. and that if all could not be car
ried into effect the legislature woula not
pass the residue independently ana II
yome parts are not constltutional all tne
provisions which are thus dependent, con-
ditiopal or connected must fall with
them"
The foregoing, from Chief Justice Full
ler's decision in the income tax cases,
contains the foundation for the super
structure of opinion expressed IN the de-
cision. 1t is evident that in the attain
ment of this view the majority were In
fiuenced by considerations which seldom
find a standing in this court OF last re-
sort. They unquestionably went outside
OF the TeCOIQ anu luuul5SN 40 49,
pretation of the full intention OF con-
gress when that body placed the income
tax sections in the tariff bill whether
they were justified in taking so wide
range is certainly debatable subject.
That tie Interpretation is correct few peo-
nle of careful observation will dispute.
There can be no doubt that congress
would not have enacted a law taxing only
incomes derived from the prosecution OF
vocations and professions, and that II IL
could have been convinced that incomes
coming from real and personal property
and municipal bonds would be exempt
because of unconstitutionality. none OF
the income tax provisions would have
found place.
The debates in cong ress and the views
expressed by the public and private
champions of the measure made it per-
fectly apparent that the incomes es-
pscially aimed at we're those derived
from rents and bonds, and that the others
were of secondary consideration. This
impression that the first class of incomes
constituted so vital part OF the scheme
is confirm ed by the estimate quoted by
Justice Fuller, of the proportion of the
whole revenue from the income tax pro-
vision that they would furnish. Hence
the majority of the court took the liberty
of viewing all the sections relating to in
come taxes as independent and the de-
struction of one implying the same fate
for others.
Justice Harlan's dissenting opinion
reads more like political speech than
the opinion of learned jurist delivered
in the highest court in the land. and
dealing with cold, legal propositions in
a capacity not permitting him to con-
slider the constitutional provisions that
should exist, or the bad effects that
might follow strict adherence to the
constitution as it is.
As far as can be learned from the tele-
graphic dispatches, the one place in
: which he dealt solely with the legal as
pect OF the proposition is found IN that
part of his opinion answering the con-
tention that. the provisions for the income
taxes are so interviewer that they must
stand or fall together. He says:
''If therefore. all the income sections
of the Wilson act must fall because some
of them are invalid, does not the judg-
nent this day rendered furnish ground
for the contention that the entire act
falls when the court strikes from it all
income tax provisions, without which
the act would never have been prepared?''
In these remarks he treats the income
tax sections for what they really are,
parts of the tariff measure. and not in
themselves comprising separate enact
ment. and in doing SO be carries the rea-
soning of Chief Justice Fuller that the
sections OF revenue measure are inde-
pendent to its logical conclusion. To
say the least he makes a strong showing
to the effect that if the line of argument
pursued by the courts majority is correct
then the whole tariff act passed by the
last congress is unconstitutional. A ref
cree in debate would be inclined very
much to say that the oratorical old JUS
tice had put his opponents on the bench
into an argumentatve hole.
The other dissenting opinions seem
given up altogether too much to the evil
effect that might follow an acceptance of
the majoritys decision. This is some
thing that courts and judges have moth
ing to do with and have little business to
consider. Their responsibility ends with
legal construction OF the law in contest
There is little doubt that there was much
about the disputed sections that was un-
just and undemocratic in principle and
un-American in method. Neither of the
great political parties had promised the
enactment OF such legislation if seated
in power; it really seemed an after
thought, and the proposal to incorporate
income tax laws in the new tariff bill be-
came of prominence only after the con-
gress elected in 1892 had entered upon
its duties. There will be little mourning
over its death.
In one respect My was it an improve
ment on and prefe rable to tariff it was
tax on what people have, instead of OH
what they consume.