The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1910-04-13
HUGHES RIGHT ON INCOME TAX
SAY CBO trE AND OTHERS. DIS
AGREEING WITH ROOF.
RcaeSaI PoweT 10 Taa InrSme 'FrOn' What.
r,sr source Without the Pr"Scrih-d
.NPpSr'ISnmenI An'SnE the sta'e>
WouAd lmDertl No, errlgn niEhis.

NsuAd lmDeril sS' eTrIgn niEhis
In q memorandum which ha- Just h"en
submitted TO ,he Isgislal ure ~ 0pPo~,''oa
TO the proposed income 'aH amendment
- m. Constitution Of N. n,t-d States
Joseph n. Choat-, William - Guthrie
Victor MorAwstI. AuStsn G. Fox ami
John q yhlhurr not only contend 'hrS
Gov. Hughes was right m obieC,us be-
cause Of The power the amendment would
1--WE the national Government To tax state
and municipal sscurtie-. but they also
90 further than the Governor AMI insist
hat To adopt such an amendment would
- 10 remove 'he protection against an
abuse OF the 'AAing power ~ hich ths on
-titution contains IL he rrI's oC appor-
ftonm@nt adopted - comprcms~ IA
The constitutional COW ention, asateguard
~ necessary now a. Il ~sls when che Con
sfitiItion va framed
In a separate insmOr an iun uhicI -
app4ndad Francis LYME Stet-on concvrs
NTH all his Siistin g1ished brethren OF th-
New York bar In regard to the efec' of
The words from whatever source de-
1ved' IN the proposed amendment. but
dissenss from them in asserting that an
income tax levied BY AppoTtionm"n, would
zoe BE- practicable MT. Ststson saws thai
he would not oppose an income TAX amend
mens provided u was put IN proper FORM
Ths memoranda Of the SIN layers
directly replies 80 some Of The contentious
made by Senator Root N his recent re-
Jcina,sP 90 the arguments -: Gov Hughes.
In the majority memorandum Mr.. Choatc
and his associates AZ th. outF~' declare
that certainly congress never should
lavs the pUwsr to taK state Or municipal
securities or the salaries of State ar mu-
nicipal officials. because -'Irh a 'Ow--
would seriously impeIii the IndeG endence
and autonomy ~ the States
Examining the contention vhtHh hey
cay the leaders II ongr~-s are nov max
ing, that the words -trrfn WhI'"r"r
sogEre~ derived could not ~. CONSTRUED
a. intending TO give thus power. the memo
rAndum say- that the history az ih"
measure ~ The HOUSE and senate APPEAR
90 contain no explanation or debate OF
this point a. all. They sty.
st 10 now urged hv distinguished Ser
ators and economists fhal the clan"
fror, " hatever sour~.. derived NAV safely
he disregartsd and h.. treated n wholly
negligible and meaningless and ina. .
xo,Ild h.. The duty of the courts - CON
s,rue and apply tho amsrfnI~nt =. 4 rh,s
particular clstrse bad not been inserted
We submit thai his contention ~ Va d,r'ci
conflict with one Of the Fundamental and
hesi settled rules 80 constitutional con
srructiOn.-
The lawyers quote from decis'o1 o'
rhe Supreme Court written nv Ch,-i
Justice Marshall to the effect 'hrr ~ ,"u,
CONSTITUTION was Intended 10 - N1troi
effect. and from another Il met 'U-'
Tansy to the same "feC' ~" r'"rr
Eanfun ssys:
y, tho hight of ths-e Cpn1n- - r0rs.r
ton Whi.h have never seen asf.--r fnYrs %
aay ~s@e are ~ optntpn T4l' b. .R.
trenraly unli.-.. ths' tho -u1T-U" ,'H-.
81 he uitsf STATE. ~ur'd gold 80. Pre-
.IarIse ROW vhate'-r 80. 30 l,r.. H..
Nps 'sefpinzi-zs and ineffective fhat OBJ"
word, vrrc not smplsy ID r 'h"ir pAI .rti
r@use fhat 'hs t"ngrr-- and the - % ID"
did not intenl o. lat Tho. .a.d or 'N~r 'ur
En~adurn' dtd MOI confer power - '.r
INCOMES derive frorn ~'a'~ All '0 .' '..
psi hond- or 10 -aia-ie- ~ state n~
y - certainly dir'-ilr n" rr-'si,a In. ..
sour'- losirs'ly '0u.d T-.r't fn'. 'u'. .u-. 100
nat inc0rle- from STATE houH- al' ID"
.a'.rts- ~ state "@i'.al- puU. uuf .s
rFNah'a und"- no p-oun-es aHrruHr"rf
.N,e'' Co., N"idins iha' -u'r .u'yr~~ a"r.
no, deri, 81 from 7-g sour
It's frITthsr pointed ont thar ~" arr"
ION grs-=s which frs r..-' fhs f'r 'rr-si
amendment lu'. Ts~.faf"d fu tn- u"1
tlnh Law a '"rp.r tti"U la. AMI TIA
IN the teal cs-@- growing "r = tnal
taN the Gov~TnW-ut ~ ~ argument had
INSISTED -uh-ts tallv NOT only that Con
.,r-s- could ,.,U-titIuofauy taN state
and MUNICIPAL h"nds when held 10y cor
- ratiuns but thai the woF't- from al
sources must 10. h-ld 80 cover income
sTafu such scurtie- IN the fars there
tore. e the r-peat~d attempts mad"
- impn-e such "a xe- and T~ts~a tst
decisions by the supreme Court that NO
sSlch power eTIsts under the Constitution
nov " - hardly IA l- supposed -ay
the author ~ the memorandum. that the
co,irts when s-S-d 10 pa>- GA the new
amendment. n adOpted IN 10 present
form. would not feel constrained - hold
mat the Nords from whatever SQUIRE"
derived excluded any implied imita
ton. The memorandum Il Mr. 'husr-
ami ~ associates gn'- ~ - -s'y her"
o. - % mailer ul ,Ssar.ou $40. lee. e. rH,
ti.s Siztcrnjl inrraIrnsrf VS. prrIr-..i
a. na-T ~ = Programme d" -,', ur- tie la-.
.agc u ne Payns- N.|rish arm Itr
.rher ~ %ens'or, ard r~v-.-~uti'l,
Ners ia sting UPON 'f- Insertion 10 rHs
tATih lay IT a general i1'ours 'as similar
- the 'AN inserted N 90" I"' W I>H'. wI,r
The hote thai rho ~uUrriur '"u'r oI tH"
nits,i states inigti ~. induce 10 r~.rr-..
IT, ralIng ~ the in'prns tax cts~- ~ 80
- order 20 s,oid an su"h prov r-iou D.
ths a. 81 200 ,JTtBT"r7i-s So n ate
undsT y hisE The ma or''r agreed 20 na--
'"tni resolution 20 s'rrnd 'h- on-''Y-
ton 81 tire ultsd ~ s'-s 80 a. lowest m .H"
~ tionai GoS eminent poa-r 70 IAy Dire
in. nm" takc- without aVrnrt'onmcm la