disclose the facts required of him when he is called upon, without fining him for not neglecting his business and dancing attendance upon the pleasure of a collector for the privilege of revealing to him facts that he withholds from everybody else." In a letter dated May 6, 1865, the Deputy Commissioner says: "As to the questions recommended to be asked by assessors — and to which you take objection it is believed the same are civil, and as such ought to be answered, if an assessor feels bound to ask them. It is not claimed that taxpayers are obliged to answer the same; but a refusal, unless a reason for such refusal is given, might lead the assessor to doubt the correctness of the return. It is not supposed that the mere putting of these interrogatories will be an effectual check to fraud, but the experience of the office has shown that such questions are of great convenience in refreshing the memory of a large class of honest taxpayers, who are not accustomed to keeping accounts, and who, in many instances, cannot call to mind all the sources of their income, unless they are thus reminded. As to the question to which you particularly allude, if the taxpayer answers that he holds no stocks except such as were purchased so recently that he has derived no income from them, the assessor would go

no further, if satisfied of the truth of the statement." 1 Int. Rev. Rec. 155.

That lawyers and physicians might return either the actual fees received during the year, without regard to the time when they accrued, or the amounts due to the business of the year; but that when the taxpayer had heretofore adopted one method, he could not be allowed to make use of the other. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 59.

That an assessor might require returns of income from persons sojourning in his district for a few months at a time, and transmit the same to the assessors of the several districts in which the parties resided. Bout. (1864), 154.

That the law did not require notice to be served on persons to make returns. 3 Int. Rev. Rec. 151.

That under the act of 1894 the instruction as to the income return by trustees meant that the sum received from trustees by beneficiaries should not be returned as "taxable income"; that the same should be, however, noted as income, or deducted as an amount upon which the tax has already been paid and that the instruction referred practically to cases of beneficiaries who had income in addition to that received from a trustee, and was intended

to prevent escape of income from taxation. Further that, where a trustee distributed taxable income to beneficiaries, he must make a return for each of said beneficiaries, as the taxable interests appeared, at the place of his residence, without regard to the location of the beneficiaries. 41 U. S. Rev. Journ. 77.

That legal representatives should make return for their decedents. Mandell v. Pierce, 3 Cliff, 134; 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 59, 193; Bout. (1863), 304. See provisions of present act cited on p. 60.

That in the case of an association like the Shakers, its trustees might make return of its income. 10 Int. Rev. Rec. 39.

That in case of persons under guardianship, the guardian, if any, should make return of the ward's income; if none had been appointed, the parent, as natural guardian, might act. If there was no other person to act, the ward might make the return; if he neglected to do so, an independent assessment might be made omitting the penalty. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 59; 11 Int. Rev. Rec. 186; Bout. (1863), 258.

That the guardian's return should always be upon information and belief. 1 Int. Rev. Rec. 181.

That the guardian's residence determined the district for his return; if he resided abroad, the

ward's residence determined the district. 3 Int. Rev. Rec. 172. The duties imposed on trustees and guardians are further discussed in the Wall St. Journ. Art. XIV.

That taxpayers, not cognizant of their responsibilities, ought to be informed of them, and those unable to make out their returns should be instructed. 41 U. S. Rev. Journ. 97.

That even though a false return was accepted without alteration and the tax paid, it had no binding effect upon the government. 41 U. S. Rev. Journ. 97.

It was stated under the old law that it would be a hardship to assess an additional amount upon the income of masters of vessels, who left home before a certain date, being ignorant of the law, leaving no agent, etc., "and it is presumed that assessors might find some means of ascertaining their income without proceeding under" the law. Bout. (1864), 154. The form of notice under the old law to parties charged with failure, neglect, or refusal to make returns is given in 9 Int. Rev. Rec. 113.

REMEDIES.

The remedies of a taxpayer in case of an increase of the return are a hearing before the collector, and from him an appeal to

the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

See

p. 64.

Speer says at p. 30 as to claims for abatement or refund of taxes: "If any person shall consider that any tax assessed has been erroneously or unjustly assessed or that the amount of such tax is in excess of the amount actually due, such person may file a claim for abatement before the tax is paid, or a claim for refund after the tax is paid, asking for the refund or return of all or such portion of the tax assessed or paid which is considered to be in excess of the amount actually due.

"Such claims must be prepared on forms furnished by the collectors, who will also furnish full information as to their preparation and the nature of the evidence required in support of the claim. Such claims must be filed with the collector."

The general method of procedure, however, is as follows:

There is no remedy by injunction, as it is provided that "no suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court." U. S. Rev. Sts. § 3244.

Points on applications for the writs of mandamus, certiorari, and prohibition against collec