The weekly intelligencer. [volume] (Lexington, Mo.) 1891-1901, 1895-05-25
THE INCOME TAX.
The Law Overthrown by tho SUI
Ere me CCuit.
Five OF the Justices Agree That II Is Un-
constitutionai-Four Dissent-t hicf
Justice ullcr Delivers the
Opinion of the Court.

The Law yoiI.
WAsUISGroN. May 2l.-Thc United
States supreme court yesterday de-
clared the income tax law unconstitu-
tional in toto. Chief Justice Fuller read
the decision of the majority. reading
from manuscript. Five Justices were
against the constitutionality of the law
To four fori,. Those against were Chief
Justice FI!lcr and justices Field, Gray,
Brewer anl Shiras. Those for the
law, Justices, Harlan, White, Brown
and Jackson.
All OF the members of the court were
present. including Justice jackson.
As soon as the justices had taken
their seats the chief justice began the
delivery of the main opinion. After
some preliminary talk he said
"As heretofore stated, the constitu-
ton divided federal taxation into two
great classes-the class of direct taxes
AMI the class of duties, imposts and
excises-and prescribed two rules
which qualified the grant of power as
to each class. The power to lay direct
taxes apportioned among the several
tion in the popular branch of congress,
representation based on population
ascertained by the census, was plenary
and absolute, but to lay direct taxes
without apportionment was forbidden.
The power to lay duties, imposts and
excises was subject to the qualifica-
ton that the imposition must be uni
form throughout the United States
''Our previous decision was confined
to the consideration of the validity of
the tax on the income from real estate,
and on the income from municipal
bonds. The question thus limited was
whether such taxation was direct or
not, in the meaning of the constitu-
tion and the court went no farther as
to the tax on the incomes from real es-
tate than to hold that 1t fell within
the same class as the source whence
the income was derived, that is. that
tax upon the realty and tax upon the
receipts therefrom were alike direct;
while as to the income from municipal
bonds, that eould not be taxed because
of want of power to tax the source,
and no reference was made to the ma
ture of the tax as being direct or indi-
rect
I'VE are now permitted to broaden
the field of inquiry and determine to
which of the two great classes a tax
upon persons entire income, whether
derived from rents or products or other
wise of real estate, or from bonds.
stocks or other forms Of personal prop
erty belongs and we are unable to con-
clude that the enforced subtraction
from the yield of all the owners's real or
personal property in manner prescribed
is so different from a tax upon the
property itself that it Is not direct
but an indirect tax in the meaning of
the constitution. The words of the
constitution are to be taken in their
obvious sense. and to have reasonable
construction. In Gibbons VS.. Ogden,
Mr. Chief Justice Marshall, with his
usual felicity, said: AS men, whose
intentions require no concealment,
generally employ the words which
most directly and aptly express
! the ideas they intend to convey,
|the eplightened patriots who framed
our constitution and the people
who naopteG g must be understood to
have Gnp1u1ud words In their natural
sense. and - h6pe Intended what they
have said = w E1p0af no reason for
holding otherwho thn1 ynt the words
direct taxes on the :6ns No. 1Rd du-
ties, imposts and excisef o. ~ OHM
were used in the constitutoa q tAoir
natural and obvious senses nor h or-
irving at what those terms embraoo>
do we perceive any ground for enlarg-
ing them beyond or narrowing them
within their natural and obvious i'm
port ut the time the constitution was
framed and ratified.
The chief justice next discussed the
reasons for the constitutional provi-
sions regarding direct taxation. The
states had plenary powers of taxation,
but gave up the great sources of reve-
nue. derived from commerce, and re-
tanned the power of levying taxes and
duties covering anything other than
| excuses, but in respect to them the
range of taxation was narrowed by the
power granted to the federal govern
| ment over interstate commerce. While
they granted the power of apportion-
| ing direct taxation they secured to the
states the opportunity to pay the
| amount apportioned and to recoup
| from their own citizens i'm the most
| feasible way.
| The opinion continues: at is said
| that a tax on the whole income of
property is not a direct tax, but a
| duty. We do not think SO. Direct
taxation was not restricted in one
breath and the restriction blown to the
winds in another"
| The conclusions of the court were as
| follows:
| ready announced that taxes on real
estate beinv indisputabiy direct taxes,
| taxes on the rents on income of real
| estate are equally direct taxes.
second, we are of opinion that taxes
| on personal property or on the income
of personal property are likewise direct
| taxes.
Third, the tax imposed by sections
| % To 81 inclusive, of the act of 1894, SO
| far as il falls ON the inc of real
estate and on personal property being
direct tax within the meaning of the
constitution and therefore unconstitu'
tional and void, because not appor'
toned according to representations, a II
those sections constituting one entire
| scheme of taxation are necessarily in
valid.
"rhe DEGREES hercinbefore entered
in this court will be vacated. The de-
crees below will be reversed and the
eases remanded with instructions To
grant the relief prayed"
| Sections - To 81 of the tariff act of
| 1894, referred to i'm the conclusions of
the court. are all the sections Of the
act relating to the income tax, 50 that
the entire income tax law is declared
void specifically.