Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: VRWC_minion

Not one of them since 1913 has had an honest bone in his body.

Nah your wrong!
it goes back before 1880

Springer v. United States(1880), 102 U.S. 586

  • "The central and controlling question in this case is whether the tax which was levied on the income, gains, and profits of the plaintiff in error, as set forth in the record, and by pretended virtue of the acts of Congress and parts of acts therein mentioned, is a direct tax."
  • "Our conclusions are, that direct taxes, within the meaning of the Constitution, are only capitation taxes, as expressed in that instrument, and taxes on real estate; and that the tax of which the plaintiff in error complains is within the category of an excise or duty."
  • "[W]henever the government has imposed a tax which it recognized as a direct tax, it has never been applied to any objects but real estate and slaves."
  • "If the laws here in question involved any wrong or unnecessary harshness, it was for Congress, or the people who make congresses, to see that the evil was corrected.
    The remedy does not lie with the judicial branch of the government."
  • Springer got to pay the tax on his salary too!

    Dem Judges have been scallywags since granpappy got his side arm stuck in the alligator's craw. (unfortunately he was hold'n it at the time.)

    73 posted on 03/08/2002 9:21:18 PM PST by ancient_geezer
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]


    To: ancient_geezer
    Where is paragraph A of the notice of intent to levy?
    78 posted on 03/13/2002 6:37:55 AM PST by one2many
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

    Free Republic
    Browse · Search
    News/Activism
    Topics · Post Article


    FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
    FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson