Evening star., 1924-10-26
DY HAROLD b. ROGERS,

Publication of income tax records
mas always been a sore point in Amer
lean life.
AS the nation ogles. peers, peeks,
ana pokes itstcurious way into a maze
OF fascinating names and figures these
days, history groans and gives up it's
dead ghosts of yesteryear-the shades
of post-Civil War tribulations when
the taxpayer and his friends and
neighbors were hard ridden by the
sef-same vexatious problem and Con-
gress wrestled for many seasons with
such "odious" and obnoxious" things
For, with the old experimental in
come tax laid ir 1851 came publica-
ton shortly thereafter in the news
papers OF that day of the entire tax
lists. Then arose a howl of protest
from the taxpayers. and a fight in
Congress, which lasted for years be-
fore the practice of publication was
finally abolished.
strangely do the strong sentiments
expressed these days match the ex-
pressions found in the proceedings of
Congress in 1866, condemning the bus
mess of barring financial and business
secrets of America through the in
come tax lists.
Point Warning Now.
Investigators who have probed the
record of those post Civil War days
say they find an odd similarity in the
situation and point with a warning
finger to the results then. which not
only ended tax publicity, but the
whole income tax as well in 1872.
Other opposition at that time con-
trlbuted heavily to stop that first ex-
perlmental income tax, experts agree,
but there is none who will deny that
the 'odious" publication of records in
the newspapers of the day had part
in the death of the law, which was
allowed to EXPIRE
During the greater part Of the
time that the income tax was in
force" said Joseph a. Hill. in the
Harvard University Quarterly Jour-
nal of Economics, in 1894, ''it was the
custom to publish the incomes of in
dividual taxpayers in the local news
papers. At first, in accordance with
the instructions given by the COM
missioner of internal revenue, all in
formation in regard to individual re-
turns was withheld from the public.
But in the absence of any express
legislative prohibition of publicity,
and under the pressure of newspaper
enterprise, the custom was soon
established of publishing full lists of
taxpayers and their incomes.
in support of this practice it was
urged that its effect was to increase the
assessment and secure more complete
returns But it is a question whether
its advantages in this respect were
great enough to offset the annoyance
and some injury to which it often sub
jected the taxpayer, and the odium
which was attached to the tax in con-
sequence. The practice gave rise to
much dissatisfaction and complaint, but
was not abolished until prohibited by
the act of 1870"
Similar Interpretati
One of the lively fights in Congress to
abolish the publication of returns, dur
which now is raging over the ethics of
the whole matter, took place when Rep
resentative Garfield of Ohio presented
an amendment to the tax bill of 1866 to
/, allow public inspection, but prohibit pub
lication.
Representative Garfield succeeded in
obtaining a passage of his amendment,
which, however. failed of enactment
that year. according to Seligman's "The
Income Tax which reports the new act
introduced only few amendments"
The fight over Garfield's amendment,
as revealed by the original records of
the Congressional Globe. took place at a
night session OF the House meeting in
committee of the whole May %. 1865
The debate waxed lively, and to the
very point now under dispute. Repre-