Evening star., 1940-03-11
ak
Continued From First Page.)

cernlng these questions.
In so disposing of the case, we
add that the basic question here is
not taxation as against escape from
it. We would be reluctant to relieve
Federal officials from any obligation
imposed on other citizens unless re-
qulred to do so by controlling au-
thority. Such a result would be
peculiarly unfortunate in view of
! recent decisions which have termi-
mated formerly prevailing special
! privileges of some of them. But
such is not the issue here The
question is not whether the Fed
eral official or employees shall or
shall not pay taxes on his Intangible
/ property. It is, what taxes and to
whom shall he pay them? The
rule which relieves him from domi-
cilary taxation in the District sub
Jects him to it in the State of his
domicile.
He is not, therefore, legally or
morally, placed in preferred posi-
ton. That the amount of his State
taxes may be greater or less than
those which would be imposed were
he domiciled in the District is beside
the point. Whatever the burden i'm
posed by the State taxing statutes,
that is consequence of his domicilia.
ton in the State and he must bear
1t. In view Of that burden, which
persons domiciled in the District
are not required to bear, there is
unjust discrimination between him
and them"
Mr.. Sweeney was represented by
Attorney Joseph A. Cantrel The
District government contended that
Mr.. Sweeney's long continued resi-
dence in Washington had ripened
into domiciliary change; that his
home, principal headquarters and
only domestic establishment are here
and that he has no other in Mas
sachusetts or elsewhere. The court
said today that Mr.. Sweeney was
domiciled in Boston in 1918 when
he first came here as member of
the United States military service
and since his discharge in 1919 he
has resided continuously in the Dis
trict. Since 1888 he and his wife
have maintained their only domestic
establishment in rented apart
ment, which the District contends
is their legal domicile.
Declared Intention to Return.
But Mr.. Sweeney contended that
his permanent home, legal residence
and domicile are in Boston, and he
has declared repeatedly his inten-
tion to return on expiration of his
public service here, with a view to
running for public Office or seeking
a judicial appointment in his home
State. Recently he has been an
attorney in the Department of JUS
tice.
Boiled down to it's essence, the
question here is whether a citizen
and resident of a State must sur
render his State allegiance for all
the purposes in which domicile may
be controlling when he accepts Fed
eral employment in the District OF
indefinite or relatively permanent
DURATION said today's opinion.
The question is not whether he
may do so if he wishes. To hold
that he must would create startling
consequences, including unjust and
untenable, not to say intolerable,
determinations.
Some of them may be shown
stated in the briefs or at the argu-
ment. Military and naval men, it
| Uo cnnpodnI mould WIT u, 4 rx,. -
in the State of residence at the
time Of appointment. This, regard
less OF length of absence from and
lack Of domestic habitatiora in the
State, presence of cne here or length
OF residence in the District. AS to
them, the presumption of continuity
remains in full force. Likewise with
elected officials, the President, the
Vice President and, normally, men,
bers OF Congress. So also with
cabinet officers and persons holding
only short term or temporary ap-
pointments in executive, admins
trative and congressional service.
These, it is said, either by reason
of their limited tenure and conse-
quent assumed brevity of service, or,
in the military branches, because
of its assumed compulsory char
acter and regardless of its perma-
nence, occupy special and preferred
status which prevents applying to
them criteria normally applicable
to all Others"
Contrast in Indefinite Tenure.
I'm contrast with them, it is said,
are members of the Supreme Court
and other distinctively Federal
courts sitting in the District, men,
bers of administrative tribunals en-
joying long, though not unlimited
tenure; civil service employees and
all others whose tenure is indef1-
mite or is not limited to q short
term. AS to these the argument
is carried to the full length Of the
logic implicit in the premises. It
is that upon appointment and es-
tablishment Of q place Of abode In
the District. whether It be their only