New-York tribune., 1910-03-09
STANDARD OIL, PLEA NEW TAX ASSAILED
4 FLOOD or BRIEFS.
La,c an Tiolati0n Of Justice and
Lberty. Says Foraker.

Washington. March S.-The attack on the
constitutionality OF the corporation tax
came into prominence to-day, when brief
after brief in opposition to the law was
filed in the Supreme court OF the Uniteo
States Final argument on the cases M
volvng the question is set for next week
Prominent among those flled to-day was
the brief OF ex-senator Joseph +. Foraker
or Ohio counsel for Louis w. Jared. a
stockhoIder in the American Multlgraph
Company Of Cleveland. who seeks to have
tire company enjoined from paying the tax
on the ground that 1t is unconstitutional.
Davies. Stone d AuerbaCh and Frederick
D McKenney presented brief for the
Cedar Street Company against the Park
Realty Company. of New York; Jed l.
Washburn. William u Bailey and Oscar
Mitchell, brief for Oscar Mitchell against
the Clar. Iron Company, of Minnesota;
John G. Johnson, Frederick Jcsup Slim
son, Lawrence NJ Stockton and Harris
Livermore. for Joseph +. Gay against the
Baltic Mining Company; Frederic r. Cou-
dert. for Percy II. Brundage against the
Broadway Realty Company. and Paul
La Croix against the Motor Taxtmeter
Company. of New York.
the language employed in the corporation
tax provision of the tariff law makes tt
difficult 20 ascertain just what the tax is.
The debate in the Senate, lie suggests,
warrants the assertion that the "ambigu-
ous character of the provision is due to
an effort to bring It within the courts
jurisdiction. and he contends that tie thing
taxed must be one of these:
l. The business carried on by the cor
poratiOn to he taxed.
.. The entire net income from all sources.
-. The corpora tion itself
4. The franchise TO be corporation.
The privilege or facility afforded ny
the Incorporation to transact the business
conducted by tic corporation
lie says a studied attempt was made TO
avoid using language that would indicate
that it is the business, such. that is
taxed. The trainers. he holds jnteuded TO
provide p corporation income tax without
laying it on the income, ''and" he adds.
"t is equally clear that they did not sue
ceed"
"The thing without which no .sx is i'm
posed, lie says "and which when II is had.
or possessed, determines the amount of the
tax. is so palpably the thing taxed that it
does riolence 10 common sense to claim the
contrary"
According to the natural meani1g of the
language employed, there is some excuse
for the assertion that the tax IS aid upon
the corporation itself, he says in discussing
that classification of the tax
IF the tax he on the corporation as
SUCH ne adds. "hecause of the advantages
supposed to attach To corporate organiza-
tjons for business purposes. it should he the
same for all corpora tions OF the same cap
ital and tho same class but it Is not the
same. and cannot be the same for all I'm
less the impossible result of equal incomes
from all sources has been realized
II II is tax on the franchise OF a cor
poration. Mr.. Foraker contends, II violates
the implied provision Of the constitution
that no state shall tax any iustru7nentsiity
of the federal government. nor shall Con
gress tax any instrumentality % a state
government.
An emphatic attack is made on tne pub
licity feature Of the law. Mr. Forak ker- says:
the guarantee against uurea soma bIe search
and seizure. but it is also in violation of
all th@t sens" Of justice and all that spirit
of liberty and freedom OF action which our
institutions arc supposed to secure to our
citizens and if upheld will nc . long step
in tho direction of nulltfN ing heretofore well
recognized powers of the state and such a
government at Washington an arbitrary
and irresistible power for evil Whenever. the
White House may chance to he occupied
as 1t sometimes may hc, hv 5n Executive