Tax Publicity

Fifteen minutes remained before the U. S. Supreme Court closed for the day. Solicitor General Beck, a bit snappish, a trifle overworked, was ready with another case. On behalf of the U. S., he appealed against the decision of the Federal District Court of Western Missouri which upheld the right of the Kansas City Journal-Post to publish lists of income-tax payments.

Senator Reed, anti-League Democrat, was present to argue for the newspaper. Would he be so kind, asked Mr. Taft, as to join his case with the case of The Baltimore Post, exactly similar? All present in the crowded court room glanced at Newton D. Baker, matchless pro-League orator, counsel for the Baltimore newspaper. Senator Reed politely declined the offer. Old antagonism flashed and vanished as the law ground on.

Justice Stone withdrew from the bench because he had handled the case as Attorney General.

Senator Reed asked for an extension of time. Experience in the Senate, he said, had not qualified him in compressing his remarks, and the case was great. Mr. Taft gave him 30 minutes extra.

Mr. Baker said that, if his case might immediately follow Senator Reed's, he could do with half the allotted time. Part of the court smiled.

Mr. Beck arose. His points: 1) The section of the 1924 revenue law which opens tax returns to public inspection does not conflict with Section 3167 of the Revised Statutes which forbids the publication of the returns. For a newspaperman to discover a fact is one thing, to print and publish it quite another; 2) Congress intended that the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should have control over the tax lists, and he had not authorized their publication in newspapers.

The Court went home.

Next day found seven Justices in their chairs ready for Senator Reed. "Freedom of the press," was the Senator's text. Any man can see the income tax list, can gossip to his neighbor about it, can broadcast it by radio--by what logic can a newspaper be restrained from publishing it? The Senator also reviewed the history of publicity legislation to prove that Congress had moved progressively--in 1913, 1915, 1916, 1918 and finally in 1924--towards complete tax publicity.

The Court seemed to agree with the Senator. The Chief Justice and Justices Sanford, Van Devanter, McReynolds, Holmes began to ply Mr. Beck with embarrassing questions.

"I do not care two straws," said Mr. Beck. He does not care how the case is decided, provided the Court remove the question, once and for all, from the controversy.

Argument ceased, pending consultation of the three oracles.