, 1877-08-19


Some SIC, 1000, 900 was assessed against
other corporations Us the value of their capi-
tal stock in excess Of the value Of the prop
erty of the companies. It will be seen that
the corporations paid taxes on all the tangi-
BILE property owned by them in the State,
and were taxed on nearly 100 per cent ad-
ditional as the value of their stock certii-
Gates, or evidences Of ownership in the
property originally taxed. This law is still
in force in this State, and suggestion that
it provides for double taxation, and is unjust
and oppressive, excites the most fanatical
denunciation Of capital, and the most furious
defense Of this system Of taxation.
We have repeatedly discussed the tax sys-
tenn in force in this State, treating it as the
result of ignorance and barbaric notions; but
Mr.. DAVID 4. WELLS has called public atten-
ton, through the September number Of the
Ataz,tie Monthly, to the fact that there is
another State in the Union where wilder no.
tions on economic questions prevail than
even in Illinois. The facts are briefly stated:
Prior to 1869, G. ". KIRKLAND, of Woodbury.,
Litchfeld County, Conn, loaned money
through IN agent, resident and citizen Of
Illinois, on bonds secured by deeds of trust
on real estate in the City Of Chicago. The
bonds recited that they were "made under
aud in all respects to be construed by the
laws Of the State of Illinois; that principal
and interest were payable in Chicago; that oil
taxeswere to be paid BY the borrower; that the
1a -.
becoming known, the tax officials of Wood
bury added, in 1860, to tho list Of K1n1-
LANDS taxable property the sum OF $18, 900,
and in 1870 the sum Of $4,000, to represent
the property owned and loaned by him with
out the territory Of the State. Payment Of
tax on this assessment being refused, pro-
ceedings were taken to enforce it; it was
heard in An inferior court, whence it was re-
ferred to the Supreme Court Of Errors; this
Court, four out Of the five Judges asserting,
dismissed the case: it was again referred to
the same Court for revision of errors in mat
ters of constitutional law, and the decision
was affirmed sustaining the tax; then the case
was removed to the United States Supreme
Court The dissenting member Of the Court
was Judge L. S. FOSTER, formerly Senator Of
the United States.
h1r. WELLS discusses the questions raised
by this decision in his usual clear and COM
prehensive manner. "Aro titles and debts
property ?" and, as q matter Of precedent,
he asks, What is property? This question
he answers thus:
Property is always physical actually, with in-
herring rights or titles, the product solely Of labor,
and it is always measured in respect to value and
for exchange by labor Thus for instance, fish
free in the ocean is not property; but when It is
caught through the nstrumentality OF labor it be-
comes property. Property, Furthermore, cannot
be created, except by an application Of labor OF
some kind to material substances, which, because
they substances and In order to be substances
must have both corpus, or an entity, and sikus,
OF situation
Property, therefore, IS not only always
physical actuality, but is also always "em-
bodied or accumulated 1abor." It becomes
endowed with the attributes and incidents Of
titles or evidences Of just ownership or pos
ssion,-inchoate, legal, or equitable
which inhare in the property, follow it, and
form component part of it wherever found.
II the title to the farm is property, and is
held in Connecticut, then the farm, not be-
ing capable Of being in the two States, is not
property in Illinois. Titles are inherent in