The Detroit times., 1911-01-10

the action oil eJectment Springer
filed with the supreme court a most !
elaborate brief, prepared by himself.
and said by eminent lawyers TO be ex-
haustive OF the learning on the sub
joct. But the court held the income
tax law was valid on the theory that
direct taxes in the meaning OF the
constitution included only capltatlon
OF head taxes ana taxes on real estate.
The tax on Springer's income was held
10 be in the nature OF an excise and
legal
But In 1895, an lncome-tax law,
which had been included In the VIII
son tariff act OF 1894. was brought be-
lore the supreme court in the case OF
Pollock VS.. The Farmers Loan 4
Trust CO., and in that case the law
was held unconstitutional and void.
Two hearings were had On the first
hearing, a majority OF the court held
that tax on income derived from
real estate must be apportioned as a
direct tax. but the judges divided
equally, four TO four, on the question
whether a tax on income derived from
personal property must be appor-
toned. On the second hearing. by
Ave TO four, the court held that tax
on income derived from personal prop
erty must be considered a direct tax
and must be apportioned. All the
Judges agreed, however, that taxes on
incomes derived from business or &C.
equations need not be apportioned.
Among lawyers and laymen there,
was the most intense interest In the
Pollock case, and IL has been widely
discussed IN congress and out or IL
ever since. Some one OF the justices
changed his mind between the first
and second decision. Who that JUS
tee was is more or less In dispute. II
is one or the secrets of the supreme
court room which may never be CT
vulged. One OF the dissenting opin.
ions IN the first case was by Justice
White. who is now chief justice. JUS,
tice Harlan, who is still on the bench.
concurred In the dissent OF Justice
White and added statement or his
own. The effect OF the Pollock case
decision was to make II practically
impossible for the government to col
lect a tax on incomes.
Ii is urged by those who favor the
income tax that without power to levy
IL, congress might be left helpless In
war or any great national emergency.
They point out that adoption OF the
pending amendment would not impose
the tax. Legislation by congress, FOL
lowing ratification, would be neces-
sary for that. Among the arguments
for the tax itself, is the one that taxes
on consumption, such as tariff or rev.
enue taxes, are not paid in proportion
TO what one owns, but in proportion
to what he uses or consumes, and
hence are unjust. 1t Is also urged
that the income tax is necessary TO
check the growth OF vast fortunes and
bring abonJ more equal distribution!
On the other hand, some who oppose
the tax, maintain that IL would put un-
due burdens on the weather. parts or
! the country. Others see in IL q men,
ace to the system OF protection. IL
has also been urged that the levying
| of an income tax under the amend
ment proposed would enable the ma
tional government TO tax incomes de.
rived from bonds issued by the states
or under the authority OF the states,
and would place the borrowing ca
pacity of the state az the mercy OF the
federal taxing power. This argument
was advanced by Charles 4. Hughes,
now associate justice of the supreme
4
court. when governor OF New York. 1t
was controverted by Senator Elihu
I Root, of New York.
| Among the nations OF Europe. the
, exercise of the power TO tax incomes
! is common. England has taxed in
comes at dierent times for over a
century. II was used in that country
/ for the first time in 1898. II was o
war measure growing out OF the neces,
sity for putting great armies In the
/ field to cope with France and Ma
poleon. William Pitt suggested It
when other methods OF raising revenue
were failing. II was repealed after
the battle of Waterloo but later re-
enacted Gladstone tried unsuccess-
fully in 1874 to get 1t repealed and
since then the taxation Of incomes In
/ England has continued as an unbrokeH
policy. France has adopted the in
come tax Italy has an income tax
system which is much like the Eng
! lish plan. For years. incomes have
poem taxed by the German states, the
cantons of Switzerland, the Neither
lands, Austria, Belgium. Sweden and
| ~. rlr