The Dalles times-mountaineer. [volume] (The Dalles, Or.) 1882-1904, 1895-04-13
INCOME TAX AGAIN
A Portion Of 1t Will Be Con-
sidered Unconstitutional.
OSCAR IN PRISON
The Apostle of Estheticism Lam
guishes i'm a Loathesome
Dungeon.
Some MeddIesome Preacher Interferes
in Matters Which Should Not Con-
cern Him and Receives the
Censure He Deserves.

Censure He Deserves.
WASHINGTON, April 6-The atten
tion of some members of the cabine
was called today to a dispatch from
Chicago regarding the publication
there of the supreme court decision or
the income tax, but they declined tt
express an opinion thereon, on the
ground it would be manifestly improper
to discuss any opinions of the court al
least until they had been officially
promulgated.
From another, but entirely authentic
source, it was learned that whatever
the decision of the court may be the
president will not call an extra session
of congress, and even should the de-
cision declare the law wholly uncon-
stitutional, the president will adhere
| to his determination not to call con-
gress together, and will so announce.
All efforts to secure from members
of the supreme court either an authori-
tative confirmation or denial of the
Chicago publication prove unavailing.
Senator Vorhees, chairman of the
finance committee, when told of the
publication today said: SIT may be
that portion of the law may not be
sustained. 1 consider there is possi-
bility of such result, but do not be-
lieve any one outside of the court
knows a thing about it. But sup
pose it should be true that that
portion of the law regarding and
municipal bonds should prove to be. in
the opinion of the court, unconstitu-
tional, the law will not be materially
impaired. 1t will still afford an i'm
mense revenue. Estimates are entire
ly too low on the revenue which would
be derived from the law as whole.
Instead of it including from S15, 900. 900
to $20,000,000, it will add $4,000, 900,
S75, 100000 or even 500, 100000 rev.
enue."
WASHINGTON, April 8-Chief Justice
Fuller began this morning to read the
decision of the supreme court in the
income tax case. He began by stating
the exceptions to the law as made by
counsel for the appellant as follows:
First-That the act imposes direct
tax in the respect of real estate, rents,
issues and profits as we'll as of incomes
and profits of personal property, and
not being apportioned is in violation
of section 2, article of the constitu-
tion.
Second-That the, law, if not impos-
ing a direct tax, is, nevertheless,
unconstitutional, in that its provisions
are not uniform throughout the United
States, and do not operate with the
same force and effect upon the subject
of tax, wherever found, and in that it
provides exemptions in favor of in
dividuals and co-partnerships, while
denying all exemptions to corporations,
having similar income derived from
like property values, and provides for
other exemptions and inequalities in
violation of section 8, article l of the |
constitution.
Third-That the act provides no ex-
of tax upon incomes derived
from stocks and bonds of the states of |
the United States, and counties and
therein, which stocks
and bonds are no proper subject for
the taxing power of congress. The in
come from these securities in the
United States amounts to over $685.
OOO, 900 per annum, on which the total
annual income tax would be 81 300, 900.
Coming down to the present tariff
act, he said the law was passed in
time of profound peace, and it was to
be taken as evidence that congress had
sought in this matter to form pre-
cedent and establish departure from
the established lines, and it, therefore,
became important to inquire into the
with some attention to
details, and for the purpose of compar-
ison he went back to the enactment of
the income tax during the civil war.
He quoted from decision in. the
Springer case, giving the history of the
case and devoting much attention to it,
rs he said the defense had apparently
relied upon this more generally than
upon any other precedent. 1t is, he
said, conceded in all cases, from Hyl-
ION to Springer, that taxes on land are
lirect taxes, but in some of them it
was determined that taxes on rents
derived from land are direct taxes,
while in some of them it was deter
mined that taxes on rents derived from
and are indirect taxes. Was there,
ne asked, any distinction between the
AK on land and on the income derived
rom the land? The court had been
1nable to see any distinction. He
closed by saying the court had reached
,he conclusion that a tax on rents was
invalid. The chief justice then took
lp the question of the taxation of
and state bonds. The de- {
,ision was also adverse to this part of
he law, as repugnant to the constitu-
ion. On other points the court was
livided, and therefore no opinion could
,e given. The lower court having
'uled in favor of the law, the law 8
would stand except as to rent and ,
tate, county and municipal bonds, and
m these two points it was directed that
Judgment be now reversed.
When Chief Justice Fuller had fin t
shed Justice Field began to read the /;
dissenting opinion, finishing before 2 !.
''clock. He said:
81 am of the opinion that the whole e
aw of 1894 is null and void" He laid f
tress upon the fact that the law does ;
lot exempt judges of the United States !:
ourt from payment of the tax. 1t was
lot right, he said, that the supreme f
ourt should remain silent and make f
10 protest when many United States :
Judges drawing small salaries, would
'e affected because of the law. He s
allied attention to letter once written n
" Chief Justice Chase to the treasury +
fficials protesting against the deduc- !,
ion of income tax from the salaries of
United States judges.
Justice Field was followed by Justice
White in a second dissenting opinion.
lis dissent was largely extemporaneous t,
nd very long. He favored upholding q
he whole law.
Justice Harlan followed Justice c
White in dissenting opinion, and the fl
ase closed. Nothing was said as to 4
ow any of the justices stood save the
hree who read dissents.