Shepherdstown register. [volume] (Shepherdstown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1849-1955, 1895-04-11
AN UNSATISFACTORY DECISION.

never rendered more unsatisfactory
Judgment than that announced on Mon
day upon the validity of the income
tax. From every point OF view--ir
the questions it determines and those
it fails to determine, in the grounds
of its decision and in its practical eff
feet both upon the revenues of The
government and the process Of collect.
ing them-it will disappoint alike the
advocates and the opponents of the tax
The grave questions raised as to un'
lust determinations in the law, both
between individuals and corporations,
are not determined at all, because the
court is equally divided upon them
A majority of the court holds that In
comes derived from the rent Of land
and those derived from State, county
or municipal bonds, are not subject tc
the tax. 1t may be collected upon In
comes derived from all other sources,
because it is not held invalid as to
them by a majority of the court.
The decision as to State, county and
municipal bonds, is clearly right and
was not unexpected. Z The power to
borrow money is as essential to the
State as the power to levy taxes. If
the federal government can tax State
securities at all, it can tax them SO
heavily as to make them worthless as
investments, and thus indirectly de-
stroy the power to borrow which is re-
served to the State. The case is the
same with counties and cities, which
are merely subordinate governing
agencies of the State. And upon the
same principle United States securi-
ties have always been held not to be
subject to taxation by the States.
Rents, however, and the incomes
thence derived, stand upon very diff
ferent footing. The Constitution pro-
vides that duties, imposts and excises''
levied by the federal government shall
be uniform throughout the United
States; but that direct taxes shall be
apportioned among the several States
in proportion to their numbers. y That
is to say, if "direct tax is levied, a
State with twice the population of an
other must pay twice the tax, without
regard to the value Of its property or
the ability of its people to pay. The
Supreme Court now holds that as tax
on land would clearly be a "direct tax,
so a tax on the rent of land must be
direct; and as this is not apportioned
among the States according to Popula-
ton, the income tax law is to that ex-
tent void.
AS practical effects of the decision,
the amount of revenues derived from
the income tax will be cut down one
half; those whose wealth consists in
real estate and public securities will
not have to pay the tax; and the op-
portunity is left for almost endless lit
igation by those whose incomes are
held subject to the tax. The gross in
capabilities already existing in the law
are made so much greater that it can
not continue to exist in its present
shape.
The court is so divided as to show
that merely political considerations
could have had no influence. There
is no reason to doubt that each mem
Der is sincere and unbiased in the Opin-
ion he expressed. The merits of an
income tax in general, and of this one
in particular, are as much matter OF
discussion as ever. But such a decis-
ion emphasizes the grave mistake Of
adopting policy upon which our own
party was so hopelessly divided, to ex-
cuse or palliate our failure to redeem
the solemn pledge of tariff for rev.
anna only "