The Ocala banner. (Ocala, Marion County, Fla.) 1883-194?, 1909-07-30
THE SUPREME COURT AND THE
INCOME TAX

the senate of the United States dur
ing the extra session of congress.
made the following observations on
the duties and powers of the supreme
court-its relation to the people and
the peoples relation to (which is
so pertinent that it seems to us if
ought to be read with interest by ey-
eryone, as it is handled with such ex.
IRENE tact and delicacy.
Lawyers especially ought to be in
terested in his observations on this
very important topic.
Senator Borah says:
Speaking of the decisions, Mr.. Pres
ident, and the ieda of going to the
supreme court again, will digress to
say just a word now, rather than la
ter. 1t seems to me, with all due re-
spect to those who suggest this prop
osition, that it is based upon an in
correct idea both as to the function
OF the court and the relation of the
people to the court. 1t is a great trib-
unal; it is tribunal having power to
wreck or sustain the government, al
though without command of sword or
purse.
But, Mr.. President, think of this ar
gument: Away back, just after the
constitution was adopted, congress
put tax upon what they then called
"luxuries,' or wealth." those who
had carriages, and could use them for
their own personal use. Wealth went
to the supreme court of the United
States and tested that proposition,
and said that it was a direct tax I'M
der the constitution; but the supreme
court sustained the tax.
We come down to the great civil
war, and the fathers who organized
the republican party-Abraham Lin
coin, Salmon P. Chase, Charles Sum-
ner and that class of men-again laid
the taxing power upon the wealth of
this country in the form of tax on in
comes. Wealth went again to the su-
preme court-and did what? Asked |
them to reconsider the opinion of if-
" odd years before, when they had |
settled and said what a direct tax
was. The court passed upon it again. |
IN a short time the same class Of pso- |
pie went again to the supreme court; |
and, Notwithstanding the fact that |
here had been unanimous opinion
Is to what a direct tax was, they
again asked them to reconsider it.
The next time those who were seek
ng TO escape taxation, having three
of the supreme court before
hem, they went again to the supreme
court and asked them to reconsider;
md the supreme court, with that pa
fence and broad-mindedness which
has always characterized that great
again went carefully into the
question, reviewed its former decis-
ons, went into the history of the con-
'titution and its making, and again
old the wealth of this country what
direct taxes. Four times
hey had interpreted the constitution
~ a unanimous judgment of the court,
tut still again they came and asked
he supreme court to once more re-
riew its decisions. For nearly one
hundred years, beginning with those
Who wrote the constitution of the
United States, down until years after
he close of the great war those who
we're seeking to escape taxation went
gain and again to the supreme court,
nd in the face of those decisions.
unanimous as they were, asked for a
evlew and a reconsideration of the
question. The supreme court, with
atience and care, examined the SUBJ
ect again in all its qualifications.
lime passed on, and in 1894 another ,
aw was enacted taxing the incomes ,
f the country, and notwithstanding ,
nc HNS ueclSlOnS OF the supreme c
curt defining direct tax, the untax- !
d wealth and the untaxed incomes of
his country travelled their way to the :
upreme court again and asked the ;
upreme court to review FIVE unani-
lous decisions as to what is a direct .
TX. They succeeded in what? BY
are majority of one, against the de- ,
lsions preceding, they succeeded in ;
establishing a different rule of inter ;,
rotation. AS to that decision Mr..
lstice White says:
My inability to agree with the court G
the conclusions which it has lust
causes me much regret.
reaI as Is EaSrnnnt Co.. --s---.-I