Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1895-05-21

aggregated wealth any more than the
property OF the country should be at
the mercy Of the lawless."
The Views or no other member OF the
court have been the subject OF 30 much
speculation as have those OF Justice
Jackson, who II was thought would
be practically n referee in the case.
Justice Jackson snid that his health
had not been equal 20 tho task OF pre-
pairing q formal dissenting opinion and
proceeded to give an outline OF his
Views from notes. His voice was at
first feeble. but as he became inter-
ested IN his subject he was able to
speak with more strength. although
his reading was slow aud interrupted
by frequent fits OF coughing, very pain
full TO listen to. In beginning Justice
jackson announced that he concurred
fully I'm the dissent expressed by Jus
tlce White on the former hearing and
the other justices who disscnted today.
He said ut is not and cannot be de-
nlod that under tho broad and COM
prehenslve taxing power conferred by
the constitution congress hns the au-
thority TO tax incomes from whatso-
ever source arising, whether from real
estate or personal property or other
wise. IL IL equally clear that congress
in the exercise OF this authority has
tho discretion TO Impose the tax on
incomes above a designated amount.
The controlling question now presented
ID whether the taxation OF incomes re-
celvcd from land and personally are
subject TO the rule OF aportionment.
II was not found. said the Justice. that
there was any lack OF uniformity IN
the legislation and he could not under
stand the principle upon which the
court reached the conclusion that be-
cause one branch OF the law was In
a -. H.. -
not laid by the rule OF nportionment II
thereby inynlldated another branch
resting upon the rule OF uniformity ard
against which there was no valid OBJ
lection. II the conclusion OF the court
WINS sound. the principle could with
equal proprioty. be extended 10 the
entire tarifr act.
The court. IN his Judgment. took a
wrong method OF arriving at the tINe
meaning OF tho words or direct tax
depending on tho opinions OF writer's
on the constitution, who agreed on
nothing. IL never was contemplated
by the trainers OF the constitution to
reach by direct taxation subjects OF
partial distribution. What would 10
thought OF a direct tax laid on cot
ton at 10 much bale, on tobacco or
rice, property not existing In n ma
jorlty OF tho states. They contem-
plated tho apportionment OF direct
tax on subjects having general distri-
button among the states They never
contemplated anything as direct tax.
but that laid directly upon property
itself. according 10 valuation by as
Eessment. No Intention could DO at
trlbuted to the trainers OF tho constl-
tuition 10 mako any tax which
was possible TO apportion. n tax
could not be apportioned among sew
eral states with reasonable aprpoxl-
nation 10 npply equally to all citizens
OF the country. that should be evil
dence that II was not direct tax
within the sncaning Of the conatitu-
tlon. what ~ 70 be the end Of the APP
piication OF this new rule adopted by
the COURT A tax Is laid by the general
government on all money on hand, or
on deposit, OF every citizen OF the
government, at a given date. When
laid a few parties say my dosposits
were derived from the proceeds OF
farm products or from the interest on
bonds md securities. and they nre
not therefore taxable by this law"
In my Judgment the principle an
nounced in the preceding practically
destroys the power Of tho gossrnmsnt