Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-03-07
THE INCOiiE-TsX CASES.
Arrangement Between Court and
(nnnseI -Nrxn ncuf.

Counsel - 40 Argument.
WARRINGTON. March s.-Arrango-
mcn's were made last month in 'he So-
prone Court o. the United states FOR
arrumont in the income-tax cases. A.
thc opening II the court today, Attorney
G'rorsl Olney said that there wer. lhrc"
crfeS relating 10 the income-taN no"
before tho court. two Of them TIE New
York casee) presenting idcnfcaIy m"
same questions. and based upon 40" sam"
records The third originated in the D's
trict Of Columbia. ard was The Only one
iu which tho government was directly
interested That Wax n suit he sai1.
for an injunction 10 restrain the Com
missioner of Internal Revenue from pro.
cccGiug 20 carry out tie law. Tho At
torucy-Gcneral asked that the govern
mcnt might be permitted 10 appear in
the other two cases, however. a'd h"
suggested that they be an consolidated
ara whatever time was deemed reason
able for their argument might b. given
- counsel
Cricr.lustiCe Fuller aaked If counsel on
iHo other side had anything - sugg -
iY thc matter. ana NJ Shelab1rgrr. o.
thIe city. responded that his firm ap-
reared for Mr. Moore in the suit ag1lns
Commissioner Miller. He sail he was
lgtlrur under some embarrassment. from
the fact that II had been arranged that
ex-senator EImunls who was associated
with them. should mako Tho orH arg /
u"nt iu behalf Of their client. bat that
he had been ana stiu was eick IN bed
from grip. He had received telegram
from Mr.. EGmunls. SAYING that he eX-
p.ctod 70 be able 70 appear tomorrow
end make the argument. II required
Mr. ShlllIbarEor SAID that me- h.d no
objection To- the consolidation of the
CaAsF. n q did not otherwise ablr"viate
the time 70 which they were entitled.
The chief Justice said that the Tur-
pose ~ consolidation would be for hear
ing as one case.
Mr J. G. Carter. who appears for the
Continental Trust Company IN support Of
the law. observed that the ordinary rules
governing The time for argument seemed
to be inadequate.
The chief Justice inquired how much
time counsel thought they should have
~ idea was to take the three cases to-
eethtr ami asked II one hour n addi-
tion would b. enough to satisfy coun-
s.l
Mr. 9 a Seward. who represents the
atoCkholdor, Of The New York Trust com
plnies. ard is opposed to the law. said
that he could speak for only TWO ~ the
fAN'N. III " men lil''lf Ni.I' i've f'Nlilfr''f
cug9Fed ani ne hopei that ample time
would be given.
After consulting with hts associates on
tho bench. the chief Juslir" announced
that they had decided IL allo' fon hours
T. counsel FIVE f1r each side. tha division Of
which they might adjust among themselves
II il developed that this tim" Was insult
ncIout. II would b" enlarged The gov
orum"rt he stated. would b. permitted TO
be- heard ana three counsel on u side
would D." permitted 20 speak.
The usual rule giving the opening and
closing To the appellant he said. would
DC observed. bat the Court desired that
but one counsel for appellants should Doc
heard in closing that {. that their
epce,h"s would he saudwichcd In among
tho speeches foI app"llcos
Counsel have not arranged among th'm-
solves how the division of time shah Doe
made. hut ii Is probable that ex-senator
Elmuris Nr Joseph II Choate. and Mr
Seward viii speak for the appellants in
opposition 10 the law ana the Attorney
General and MIR. Garter for the appcllees.
in favor of the law.
The argument VIII probably begin to-
morrow.