The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1916-01-25
TAXLAW UPHELD:
RICH FOR DEFENCE
United States Supreme Court Declares That Congress
Did Not Exceed Its Constitutional Powers in the
Arrangement of the Taxation System.

live are not compelled to estimate the
rental value IN making up their In
comes while those living in rented
houses and who pay rent are not al
lowed In making UP their taxable In
come to deduct rent.
"Comprehensively surveying all the
contentious" said the chief Justice, I'VE
annot escape the conclusion that they
all rest upon the mistaken theory that.
although there be differences between the
subjects taxed. TO differently tax them
transcends the limit of taxation and
amounts to a want OF due process and
that where a tax levied is believed by
one who resists It's enforcement to be
wanting In wisdom and to operate In
Justice from that fact In the nature OF
things there arises "A want OF due process
of law and a resulting authority in the
judiciary to exceed Its powers and cor
rect what Is assumed to be mistaken or
unwlse exertlons by the legislative au-
thority OF its Lawful, powers even al
though there be no resemblance OF war
rant in the Constitution for so doing
summing up the opinion of the court
on the various constitutional objections
to the tax the Chief Justice said
so far as these numerous and NIL
mute, not TO say In many respects hyper
critical, contentious are based upon an
assumed violation OF the uniformity
clause their want of legal merit Is at
once apparent. since II is settled that
that clause exacts only a geographical
uniformity. and there is not a semblance
Of groun In any " the preparations for
assuming that n violation of such uni
formity Is complained at.
SO far as the due process clause OF
the Fifth Amendment is relied upon II
%sui'lccs to say that there Is no basis for
such reliance. since it is equally well set
tied that such clauso Is not a limitation
upon the taxing power conferred upon
Congress by tho Constitution In other
words. that the Constitution does not
conflict with itself by comforting upon the
one hand "A taxing power and taking the
same power away on the other by the
limitations of tho due process lause
And no change in the situation here
would arise. even II II be- conceded, as
We think IT must Ice. that this doctrine
would have no application in IA case where,
although there was a seeming exercise
Of tho "a king powcr. the act complained
Of was go arbitrary AZ to constrain TO
the conclusion that Il was not the exer-
ton ~ taxation but a ~confiscation of
property tina Is, a taking OF the am
In violation OF the Fifth Amendment. or.
what * equivalent thereto. was so want
ing in basis for classification as To pro-
ducc such \ gross aud patent inequality
rs 10 inevitably lead To the same con-
Clusiou.
I'VE say this because none OF the
prepaS itions relied upon IN the remotest
degree present such questions. II is
true that II is deliberately insisted that.
although Their" b' no express coustitu-
tiunal provision prohibiting. the pro-
gressiNe feature " tho tax causes II
TO transcend IN" conception of all tan
alton and TO be a mere arbitrary abuse
Of power which must he treated as want
ing In due process.
Not q New Precedent.
But the contention d~isrcCards the fact
that in the very early history of the
! Government a prog r"ssivc tax was i'm
posed 10y Congress and that such au-
! thority was eNericd In some. II not all.
of the various income taN,s enacted
! prior to 1884, t. which We have previ-
ousiy advorted.
And over and above all this tn. con-
tcution all hut d~isrrgHrds the further
fact that its absolute want 9~f>fouuda-
I ton IN reason "ds plainly pointed out
iu kuowltun ". Moore. supra. ard the
right To- urg" 1t was necessarily fore
closed by the ruling IN that vase made.
IN this situation II Is. ~ course.
s~upori'upus to say that arguments az
to ia" cNpodi"nry uf lrvylug such taxes
or of the economic mistake or wrong
involved ga their imposition are beyond
Judicial rugnl2aucc BESIDES this dem
onstration of the want 81 merit i'm the
contention based upon IN" progressive
feature Of the tax. the error In tho 9th.
crs IL equally we'll established either hy
prior decisions ur 10y the adequate bases
for classification which are apparent on
IA" face of tn" assailed provisions. that