The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1895-05-24
A Disastrous Blow at Constitution.
al Power.

The manner in which Justice Shiras
changed his opinion on the income tax
case certainly commands attention. II
such law as the income tax law can be
declared unconstitutional then almost
anything can be declared unconstitu-
tional. Ii looks very much as if the five
justices were looking for an excuse 10
stand in with the millionaires OF the
country. There is nothing in the world
more reasonable than to tax large in
comes and it certainly is in keeping with
formof government by the people and
for the people. Justice jackson has a
level head as the following will clearly
show, and as well that he was honest
and upright IN his opinion, something
the DEMocRAT does not believe can be
said OF the opinion of Justice Siiras and
one or two others:
"It is not and cannot be denied that
under the broad and comprehensive tax
ing power conferred by the constitution,
congress mas authority to tax incomes
from Whatsoever source, whether from
real estate. or personal property,o other
wise, 1t is equally clear that congress in
the exercise OF that authority has the
discretion to impose the tax on incomes
above designated amount. The under
lying and controlling question now pre- :
sented is whether The taxation OF incomes
received from land and personality are
subject TO the rule of apportionment. 1t
was not fonnd that there was anv lack oi
uniformity in the legislation. and can
not understand the principle upon which
the t lurt has reached the conclusion that
because one branch OF the law was in
valid, or for the reason that the tax vas
not laid bv rule of app ortionment, il
thereby invaiidated another branch, rest
ing upon the rule OF uniformity. and
against which there was no valid objec-
ton. II the conclusion OF the court was
sound, the principle could with equa
proprie.y be extended TO the entire tarIf
act. The court took a wrong method oI
arriving at the .sue meaning Of the
words direct tax depending on the
opinions of writers since the constiiu-
tion was framed, who agreed on moth
ing
"ln my judgment. the principle an
nounced in this decision practically de-
s,royed the power OF the government Il
reach iacomes. There is no real differ
ence between changing the existence o
the power TO tax incomes from real anC
personal property and attaching condi
,ions and requirements 20 its exercis,
. that will render It impossible or incaps
able OF any practical operation. Yor
might just as we'll strike at the power Il
reach incomes from the sources indiest-
ed as to attach these conditions of appor
tionneEt, which nc legislature can un-
dertake to adopt and which cannot +,
| forced with any degree OF equality il
! taxation but the further principle that il
the imposition OF taxes the burdens
/ sLoulu Sr III pt seu ou siioeS uANink 1h'
most ability 10 bear them. This decis
ion works out directly opposite Tesni
in relieving the citizens having ia,
greater ability, while the burdens OF tax
alton are made TO ia most heavily an'
oppressiyely upon those having the leas
ability. Considering it in all its bear
in,s. the decision lie ;hc most disastrou
blow ever struck at the constitutions
power of congress. !. strikes down a
important portion OF the most vital es
sential power OF the government