St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-04-09
LAW DEFECTIVE
Income Tax Statute Torn Into
Tatters by the Supreme
Court.
AS TO RENTS AND BONDS.
The Measure Is Held to Be
Unconstitutional and
Void.
THE COURT EVENLY DIVIDED
Regarding Other Important
Points at Issue in the
Case.
HARLAN AND WHITE DISSENT
rs to Rents--Field, Brewer,
Gray and Shiras Oppose
the Entire Law.
THE COURT EVENLY DIVIDED
HARLAN AND WHITE DISSENT

WASHINGTON, April S.-After
almost a month of deliberation the
United States supreme court rem
dered it's decision today in the in
come tax case, deciding by a divid-
ed court the law to be valid, except
regarding the income derived from
rents and from municipal and state
bonds, on which point the decision
was that the tax was unconstitu-
tional.
The effect of all the opinions de-
livered is to show that the court
was unanimous in the opinion that
the law is unconstitutional as TO
municipal and state bonds; that
Chief Justice Fuller and Justices
Field, Gray, Brewer, Brown, and
Shiras held it to be invalid on in
comes derived from rents and that
Justices Harlan and White dissent
ed from this opinion as tC rents.
1t is impossible to state the exact
division as to the validity of the
other parts of the law, further than
was disclosed by the proceedings.
1t appears quite clear that Chief
Justice Fuller and Justices Harlan
and White
VOTED TO SUSTAIN
the other parts. of the law and the
best opinion obtainable is that JUS
tice Brown stood with them in this
opinion, which would leave JUS
tees Field. Gray, Brewer, and
Shiras as the opponents of the law
as a whole.
The opinion was general among
lawyers and legislators that the
case would be reached today, and
the interest which had charac-
terized the case from the beginning
was again made manifest by an I'M
usual attendance of the people in
the courtroom. The space is limit
ed at best, but every available seat
inside and outside the bar was oc-
cupied, and many were turned
away, because the chamber could
not accommodate all who applied
for admission. Only members of
the bar were admitted to the inner
circle, and those in attendance in
cluded many lawyers from other
cities, as well as a large represen-
tation from Washington. There
were several senators in the list, in
Guiding Hill, of New York; Lodge,
of Massachusetts, and Lindsay, of
kentucky. Attorney General
Olney was also present.
There was only one. member of
the bench absent-Justice Jackson.
who has not been able to attend
upon the court since last fall, and
who has not participated in the
consideration of the case in any
way. 1t is to his absence that the
even division of the court on the
majority of the propositions invol-
we'd in the case is due If he had been
present such result would have
been impossible, and the opinion
would have included a decision of
all the points involved, instead of
only the two in regard to incomes
derived from rents and municipaI
and state bonds.
The spectators had not long to
wait for the beginning of the deliv-
cry OF the main opinion otter the
court convened. The judges filed
promptly in at high noon, and there
was very little preliminary work be-
fore the chief justice began the de-
livery of an opinion which is re-
garded by many as the most impor-
tant and far-reaching in it's effects
that has been rendered in this court
since the days of the rebellion. There
were only two minor decisions rem
dered by other members of the
bench, when Chief Justice Fuller.
after making few routine an
nouncements, began, at 1905, to read
the courts decree in the case of
Charles Pollock versus the Farmers
Loan q Trust company and others.
IhlS was the first in order of the
cases against the trust companies.
and the conclusion reached in it ap-
plies also to the case of Hyde versus
the Continental Trust company. as
the questions at issue are the same in
both cases. The chief justice read
with considerable rapidity, but his
voice was at all times clear and dis
tinct, and the lawyers present who
had familiariZed themselves with
the case had little or no difficulty in
following him. The delivery of the
opinion consumed an hours time
and all present gave the closest at
tention.
MIR. FULLER BEGAN
with brief reference to the question
of Jurisdiction in the case. This
point had, he said, been frequently
referred to, but he dismissed it by
saying that as the question had moi
been raised in the court below and
had been waived in the argument OF
the case in the supreme court, there
appeared no objection to considering
uhe case purely on its merits.
Proceeding to this end, he gave