The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1895-04-17
INCOME TAX DECISION.
TCONTINUED FROM PAGE ONE.

far as it related to the payment OF the
tax on rents and State and municipal
bonds, was reversed. In the Moor case
the effect of the Courts action is to
affirm the refusal of an injunction
against the commissioner Of internal
revenue.
Justices Field and White read inde-
pendent dissenting opinions.
Justice Field devoted some time to
a review of the provisions regarding
rents and denounced the principle
sought to be established blythe income
tax law. Many of his conclusions
were in conformity with those express
ed by the Chief Justice. He also at
tackled the law on account of its lack
of uniformity and dwelt upon its ex-
emphons and the many discrimination
found therein. Taking up the exemp-
ton of mutual insurance companies,
he declared that they were conducted
on lines identical with those on which
large corporations were conducted
for the mutual benefit of stockholders
He inveighed against the exemption Of
saving and building associations,
which were not charitable institutions,
but conducted for either money-mak'
ing or money saving. All these ex-
emptions stamped the law as class
legislation of the most pronounced
character. The law violated every
right and comfy guam teed under the
Constitution. That there shouldbe any
doubt about the subject surpassed his
comprehension. If the census figures
didnot convince one Of the magnitude
and injustice of the exemptionshe did
not think Congress could be convinc-
ed, though one rose from the dead"
to convince it. The law was also in
valid in that it levid tax upon the
salaries of the one hudred and one
Judges of the United States, many
of whom received small salaries.
If the provisions Of the Constitution
could be set aside by the arbitrary act
Of Congress, were, he asked, would
this power end2 It was but stepping
stone to other greater acts that would
eventually open the way for a war be-
tween the poor and the rich. Such
power assumed by congresses and per-
mitted to 20 unchallenged would
mark the hour when the decadence OF
the nation would commence. If the
limit by the exemption could be fixed
at 81, 900 future Congresses might tx
it at SIS, 900 or $29, 900, thus compel
ing one class alone to pay the tax. Or,
the limit might be fixed at an amount
as board Of walking delegates might
determine to be necessary.
In conclusion Justice Field announc
ed his opinion that then hole law OF
1894 should be declared to be null and
void.
Justice White prefaced his dissent
ing opinion with the statement that
the custom of rendering long dissents
in a Court OF last resort was more
honored in the branch than in the OBJ
servance. Their only effect was to
weaken the efficacy of the opinion!
of Court. Justice White SAID
he should not speak to-day
but for the fact that the Court
had overruled and set aside established
precedents and the settled and uniform
doctrine of the supreme Court down
to the present time. He regretted that
at this late day this Court should thus
over throw and nullify an Act of Con
gress, supported and affirmed by all
text writers and by every decision OF
the Supreme Court of the United
States.
When the fathers constructed our
from of government they gave it, not
limited, but unlimited power to levy
taxes, with but one exception, that OF
taxing exports. The assertion that
the constitutional power of Congress
was limited was, he thought. the fund
amental error in the reasoning of the
majority of this Court. The great
question before the Court was, is the
incom tax direct tax? That question
was practically decided hundred
years ago, and he did not deem it nee
essary to enterinto an elaborate review
of the cases that had been decided. In
briefly reviewing the cases presented
to the Court he observed that the ar
guments made and the citations used
in this case were the same as those
brought out in the Hyton case, and
now this Court was asked to again
take up the question adjudicated by a
unanimous Court a hundred years
ago. Justice Harlan was of the opinion
that a tax on gains, profits and income
derived from rent of lards was not
direct that under numerous decisions
of this Court the income derived from
municipal bonds was not the subject
of specific taxation in any form by the
United States: In other matters he
was in accord with Justice White.
At 2.35 the Court concluded the
reading of opinions.
Upon the question Of the Constitu-
tionality of the taxation of incomes
from State and municipal bonds the
Court was unanimously in the mega.
tive. Upon the question of taxation of
rents the Court stood as follows: At
frming, Justices Harlan and White;
against the law, Chief Justice Fuller,
Justices Field, Gray, Brewer, Brown
and Shiras.
Upon the general question of the
constitutionality of the law the Court
is said to be divided as follows: For
the law, Justices Harlan, Brewer,
Brown and White; against the law,
Chief Justice Fuller, Justices Field,
Gray and Shiras.
The President was informed of the
income tax decision shortly after it
was rendered by the Supreme Court,
and at l 80 ne summoned Secretary
Carlisle to the Executive Mansion and
the two discussed the matter for some
time. Other members of the Cabinet
dropped in later, among them the
Attorney General. The decision was
a disappointment, but the Administra-
ton will at once issue instructions to
collectors of internal revenue to con-
form to the emasculated law. Secre-
1 J J