The herald., 1895-05-07
NcOme Tax Matter Comes Up
for a Rehearing
JUSTICE JACKSON PRESENT
The Jurist Sits Virtually in the Character
of Umpire
Many Prominent People Were Present to Listen
to the Argument Speech
of Attorney Guthrie

WASHINGTON, May 6.-The supreme
court, with it's full membership of nine
justices OH the bench for the first time in
many months, began the hearing today
of the income tax suits.
Justice Jackson of Tennessee, who has
been absent from Washington the greater
part of the past year, seeking restoration
90 health, took his seat with extraordin-
ary interest attached to his presence,
since he assumes practically the position
Of umpire upon the vital question of the
principle upon which the law is based,
which divides the other justices into
equal factions. Justice Jackson did not
appear to be feeble. but it was plainly ev-
'dent that he was far from being well
man, and that only by strong effort
did he sit throughout the hearing.
Most conspicuous among the spectators
in court was Postmas ter General Wilson,
che chairman of the ways and means
committee that framed the tariff act !;
Representative Mcmillan of Tennessee.
chairman OF the sub committee which
drafted the income tax provisions, and
eX-Speaker Crisp of the house. The at
tendance of lawyers and others having an
unofficial interest in the matter was no.
ment of the law, and after the usual con-
tingent of casual tourists had satisfied
their curiosity to obtain sight of the
prominent men, the court room was not
crowded.. But two arguments are to be
made for each side-by Attorney General
Oleny and Assistant Attorney General
Whitney for the government; by w. G.
Guthrie and Joseph Choate and the ap-
rellants. who are Messrs. Hyde and Pol
lock. Today Mr.. Guthrie delivered his
speech and Mr.. Whitney began his. which
he will finish tomorrow. AS the time
assigned is five hours to each side. the
arguments Will be closed Wednesday al
ternoon.
Mr.. Guthrie began by saying that coun-
sci for the appellants in the case had been
subjected to considerable criticism for
their motions for rehearlng, but they
had felt justified in the realization of the
TACT that there were many points still un-
decided in the definite and final adjudi-
cation of which the entire country was
vitally interested, and he assured all con-
cerned that the counsel for the appellants
IN the presenst case would approach it in
a spirit of the highest patriotism and
with no desire for mere self -aggrandize-
ment.. He said that the question involved
was constitution one, and added:
1.-The constitution is the political creed
and conscience of the nation. which must
control and rule our destiny, and in so
lar as this court shall preserve it intact.
according to its letter and spirit or per-
nit the darkness of error to affront its
light, SO will our future see progress or
decl Inc, happiness or misery, glory or
shame. There can be no law inconsis t.
ent with the fundamental law. and cen;
tury of error cannot overrule the consti-
tuition. The question is not to- be deter
mined by considerations of present ex-
pediency or practicability or hardship. but
according to the lights, the purposes. the
intentions of the trainers, and as they in
tended the constitution to operate. SO
must we enforce it today.
1.-The pc ople are not to be deprived of
inherited rights, such as are i'm bedded
in our constitution, by mere precedent or
technical application of the rule of state
DECISIONS.
The point of contention. SAID Mr..
Guthrie, was that the authorities establish
the principle that taxation upon the in
come of one class of property is as objec-
tionable as upon another. He charged the
Hilton case with being the sole cause of
all the error in this matter. 1t was, he
said, political case in which the admin
istration OF Washington was pitted against
the anti-Federalists. and a case in which
the local prejudice cut an important fig
ure. He controverted the opinion that
the decision in the Hilton case had been
as deciding that only the capi-
tation tax and the land tax were direct
taxes, and asked if this was so why was
congress, in 1876, less than thirty days
after the decision was rendered. had in
sturctcd the secretary OF the treasury by
resolution to report plan for laying di-
.ect taxes by apportlonment.
Mr.. Guthrie then presented at some
length the contention that, as it was
clearly the intention of congress to have
the law act as a whole upon the incomes,
the provisions which are unquestionably
void, invalidate the whole act. The law,
~ S''N' SNPiOoSiJ ICutS anu
other incomes from land and personal
property and in language covers also in
come from municipal bonds. The govern
ment has insisted it was not only the in
tention. but within the power of con-
gress. to tax the income from municipal
bonds. The object of the act is single and
enGire. that is to say. the taxation of in
come from all sources. In order to pre
serve the provisions now remaining. the
court must strike out words actually used
such as rents. income and product of
land.
He declared the act should be sent back
to congress. because it is arbitrary and
unjust and in violation of the EXPRESS
of the constitution. He then
took up the question of exemptions and
repeating much OF the argu-
ment advanced at the first hearing. and
asked the court to declare the whole act
unconstitutional because Of the exempt.
tions.
Replying to the suggestion of Attorney
General Olney that in the light of the
recent decision the government should