The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1902-09-03
PUT UP A STIFF FIGHT
e J. Best argues as Attorney Before
Corporation Commissioners.
JUDGE 7. R. PURNELL FILES A RESPONSE
He Says II Is Contrary to tn. Constitution Of
the United States. What the Conslitu-
ton Really Does Say in the
Matter.

The Corporation Commission decided
yesterday that the incomes of the Fed
eral office holders must be listed for
taxation.
1--WE have decided said Chairman
Mcneil yesterday afternoon, that all
incomes except those which are derived
from property that is taxed are liable
to taxation"
Yesterday morning, in accordance
with the notice sent out by the Conn
mission, Tax Listers c. d. Arthur and
c. f. Cooke appeared before the Com
mission to show why the incomes OF
Judge Thomas r. Purnell, Postmaster
C. T. Bailey and Assistant Postmaster
Phil H. Andrews, and others had not
been listed.
Mr. Cooke testified that Judge Pur-
nell had. advised him that the salaries
of Federal judges and postmasters were
exempt from the tax, and that, acting
upon that advice he had not listed them.
Capt Bernard Register of Deeds, was
also present. merely to be witness to
listed.
The others mentioned in the notice
We're dropped, as their salaries de not
exceed $1,000, which amount is not
taxed.
Mr.. T.. ]. Best appeared as attorney
for the three defendants, and made an
argument to show that the State had no
right to tax the salaries of Federal Of
ficers fixed by act of Congress. He
filed Judge Purnells response to the
notice. as follows:
Thomas r. Purnell answering the
notice that the review referred to in a
notice issued TO C. d. Arthur and c. f.
Cooke, Takers for Raleigh town
ship, Wake county, n. c., that the in
come of certain parties among whom
is the name of respondent, that the in
come referred to is subject to taxation
in Raleigh town and has been omitted
from the tax list of said township, re-
spectfully submit:
First, that your respondent is United
States Judge and as such United States
Judge receives from the government OF
the United States a salary of five thou
sand dollars per annum, which amount
is fixed by Act of Congress and under
Article three of the Constitution of the
United States cannot be diminished
during his term of office, and is exempt
ed from any tax levied by this State
government, whether as income tax or
otherwise.
Second. that the facts in regard to
the abstract referred to are as follows:
When the abstract of 1902 was made
out, one of the Tax-Listers, who is an
officer of the State government, flled
out the blank. AS he came down the
list the said Tax-Lster asked income, to
which respondent replied, Five thou
sand dollars salary as United states
Judge: no other income. Said Tax
Lister then said L believe that is not
taxable to which respondent replied,
I think not
GAS to the abstract of 1901, accord
ing to respondent best recollection, the
foregoing facts were entered on the alb
stract with the statement that his in
come or salary as United States judge
was not subject to the income tax
The exact words of Article III, Sec
ton /, of the Constitution of the United
States, relating to the salaries OF FED
eraI judges, are: 1.-The judges, both OF the
Supreme and Inferior Courts, shall hole
their offices during good behavior, ano
shall. at stated times, receive for theli
services, a compensation which shall mol
be diminished during their continuance
in office"
The Constitution does not say, 1T VIII
be noticed. that the salary is exemp
from taxation.
The members of the Commission are
Of the opinion that the clause quotec
from article III of the Constitution is
limitation upon Congress, and does no.
operate to prevent a State from leVylns
a tax upon an income after it is in the
possession of the incumbent in offlce
However, leaving entirely out of tho
question the constitutionality of the
law, the Commission thinks that it is IL
their province only to see to it that the
enactment of the Legislature is carried
out. namely, that all incomes except
those derived from property that i: