The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1910-03-12
Brief Of Leading Attorney for
Plaintiffs Already Filed
With Supreme Court
BASIC eRoUnDs IS usuRPT|On
Of RIGHTs Of SOVEREIGN STATES
Destroys the Controlling Power Of
the States Over the Corporations
Which Arc Created by Them-Un.
fair and Discriminatory.

"oOuAu6tOu, MdFCQ lE-'FOr TAX.
Ing away our charters was one of the
grievances of the American colonies
against the king of Great Britain. At
the time the declaration Containing
these very words) was written the
people Of Vermont had already rem
dered conspicuous service in the war
OF independence. It would be an as
tontshing result, ii. years after that
Independence had been won, 1t should
be found that the government estab-
lished by the colonies themselves had
become an instrument for taking
away our charters"
!. That Is the climax in the brief of
Maxwell Evarets aud Henry s. Ward
ner. counsel fol Stella P. Flint of
Windsor, VT, just filed in the supreme
court of the United States in opposi-
tion to the constitutionality Of the
corporation tax law. Their main point
Is that the law, 80 far as II affects
the Stone-Tracy company is uncon-
stitutfonal because 1t invades the SOW
ereignty Of the state of Vermont. It
is also claimed that the company
would be deprived Of it's property
without due process of law, that the
law takes private property for public
use without just compensation. and
that the tax Is direct one on the
franchise and therefore unconstitu-
ttonal' because not apportioned. Mr..
Evarets started the litigation over the
constitutionality of the tax and he is
relied upon largely to present the
views of the corporations to the court
In the oral arguments of the $50 cases
next week.
The invasion of state sovereignty
through the corporation tax is actual
and real, says the brief. ..'No person
Of the slightAst sbusfeASs experient4
can doubt that the imposition. OF. the
tax and the forced publicity of cor
poratfon affatra. as distinguished from
the privacy of the affairs of partner
ships and individuals and their ex-
emptton from like tax will drive to
the wall this defendant corporation
and all similar small corporations
which compete with partnerships and
individuals.
1T may not seriously affect the
larger and stronger corporations but
1t is beyond preadventure that the
small corporations which live sur
rounded by competitors will be extin-
lguished by this law IL this court per-
mits the law to stand. All the re-
serve power of the stat to create these
small corporations would be rendered
as useless as IL it had never existed" !"
The court is told that to declare
the law unconstitutional involves no
dimunition of the potential resources
of the national government, as was
urged would be the case in the in
come tax cases.
THE taxing power of the. govern
ment" say the attorneys, may reach
the business of the defendant cor
poration for two per cent, for ten per
cent, for fifty per cent, II necessary,
If 1t will but seek out all who are en-
gagged in the same business and not
attempt to tax the corporate fran
chise. 1t is that attempt by congress
to tax a franchise created by the state
and not the general power to tax that
makes this argument
The brief claims that the law was
only superficially considered in con-
gress.
I'VE assert that no novel revenue
measure ever passed through con-
gress with less scrutiny Of it's con-
stitutionality," 1t is said in the brief.
"Not a single demonstration of its
validity as a franchise tax was ever
made or even attempted by any SEN
ator. Senator Roots paragraph skins
lightly over the thinnest ice. He mem
tions Veazie bank vs.. Fenno and offers
no reason. Senator Rayner. misled
against his instinct and better judg-
ment, by hasty reading of the same
case, conceded without argument the
vital points. Senator Brandegee and
Senator Overman doubted. and again
and again pleaded for light and rea-
son. No light was shed. No reason
was given. Except for Senator Bres-
tow's short speech. Senator Cummins
alone vigorously attacked the meas
ure as unconstitutional upon the
grounds we now urge, but his argu-
ment was unheeded, unanswered and
perhaps unheard. That there was no
answer is not remarkable"
JUST TALKED
Short Session Of Aids Probers De.
~nknN kn To1lann