Elmore bulletin. [volume] (Rocky Bar, Idaho) 1889-1906, 1895-05-25

OF the constitution. The words NJ IN.
constitution are TO be taken n ,ha,r
OBVIOUS sense and have a reasnnahIo
construction. We know no reason so,.
hoiding otherwise than that the woris
uirect taxes on one hand and duties
imports and excuses were used ~ ,b.,
constitution In their natural ana obyI-
GUS senses; nor In arriving at what
THESE terms embrace do we perceive anv
ground Tor enlarging them bevona or
narrowing them within their natural
ana obvious import at the time the com
suuhtion was framed and ratified. ana
passing from the text we regard the con-
c,usloh reached as inevitable when the
circumstances whic.. surrounded the
convention and controlled It's action ana
the views OF those who framed and
'hose who adopted the constitution are
considered" 'l
Ihe chief Justice discusses the reasons
iof constitutional provisions regarding
uirect taxation. The states had plenary
powers or taxation. he said, but gave
up the great sources OF revenue derived
from commerce. and retained the mower
OF ieNying taxes and duties covsr,po,
anything other than excises. hut in re-
spect 10 them. the range or taxatiop
was narrowed by power granted the
iederal government over interstate com
merce. While they granted the power OF
hpporuoning direct taxation. thav e..
cured TO the states the opportunfty 10
pay the amount apportioned and 10 re-
coupe from their own citizens In the
most feasible way The opiniop con
tinues: 1T is said a tax on the whole
income OF property Is not a direct tax
but duty. We do not think 80 hi.
rect taxation was not restricted IN 4
breath and restriction thrown To the
winds In another"
the opinion dismissed the HyIton case
with this comment: What was a.
cided In the Hylton case was thai a
tax on carriages was excise and there
fore an indirect tax"
Inc opinion next took up the arEu-
ment that tax on property is NOT a
uifect tax within the meaning of tho
conclusion and said: I'VE find II i'm.
possible to hold that fundamental ~.
QUESTION deemed so important as 10 h..
enforced by two provisions. one affirma-
i've and one negative. can be defined
away BY forced distinctions between
'hat which gives value to property
anu the property Itself. The stress OF
argument Is thrown. however, on the
assertion that the income tax Is nor Il
property tax at all. that its assessments
upon the taxpayer upon account of
ms money spending power as shown by
ms revenue for the year preceding the
assessment that rents are received
crops harvested. or interest collected
nave lost all connections with their ori-
gin. and although once not taxable
nave been transmitted in their new
form into taxable subject matter. In
other words that income Ii taxable. Ir- /
respective Of the source whence il Il
derived"
The chief justice said since the court
had held unanimously that recelpts
from municipal bonds should not h..
taxed because the bonds were the in
struments OF states, the same rule an
piled TO revenue from other sources NOT
subject TO tax and lack of power 10 I
levy any but an apportioned tax on
real and personal property equally ex- I
lists as TO the revenue therefrom. ..The .
court does not understand" Il says.
that the income tax has ever been re- t
garded in England as other than a d.
rect tax"