New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-08-30
TAXING COLLATERAL TNHERITANCES

TAXING COLLATERAL INHERITANCES
OF late wears several laws have been enacted
nv the Legislature Of this State for the pur-
nose Of increasing the public revenue. The
first of the series, passed in 1880, is entitled
I" An act to provide for raising taxes Tor the
use of the State upon certain corporations joint
stock companies and associations Under thls
art over 81. 800 900 annually is paid into the
treasury of New-York-a very handsome con-
tribution. The Legislature Of 1855, desiring
still further to tighten the burden OF the tax
PAYERS. passed An act to tax gifts, legaclcs
and collateral inheritanccs in certain cases.
The friends of this measure expressed the op'n-
ion that it would be worth at least 81 100000
year TO the State. The Legislature of this
wear with the same wholesome nteuo passed
{" An act to tax corporations, ioint-stock COM
panics and other associations for the privilege
of organizing under the laws OF this State
The probable amount OF money TO he derived
from this source we have never seen estimated
The law Of 1880 was regarded as unconstitu-
iional in certain quarters, and hence some OF
tho corporations declined to pay the tax which
il imposes. But they were beaten on their APP
neal to the courts. and hereafter will "comc
a contest. We believe there is no question
about the constitutionaity Of the law OF this
vear-whateyer may be said about It's eXpedi
cncv But 1t is interesting TO note that the
law of last year in regard to collateral inherit
ances Is like the law Of 1850 10 be tested in the
courts. The Albany Argus reports that pro-
cccdng has been instituted 10y the DISTRICT
Attorney of Albany County before the ourro-
gate TO compel the executors OF several estates
to comply with this law These executors.
acting on the advice of leading lawyers, resist
having the tax in question on the ground that
The law Is unconstitutional. Section 20 Of
Article 8 Of our State Constitution reads:
Every which imposes continues or revives tax shall
distinctly the and the object 10 which is TO be ap
Piled and shall not be sufficient TO refer 70 any otheF Ia" l"
such object
Now the point made by the executors is that
the collateral inheritance law does not distinctly
slate the object 10 which 1t (the taN) Is to be
applied" It's first section provides that gifts,
Iceacies and collateral inhcntanccs in certain
cases shall be subject to tax Of five dollars
On every hundred dollars for the
use of the State" The question for the courts
to decide is whether for the use OF the
State" is to be regarded as distinct state
rn>aa of the object TO which the tax is TO bc
apnAed. 1t has been decided that the provision
Il tAe Constitution referred to is satisfied by
a provision In the Tax bill that the money Is
10 he paid into the Treasury Of the State to
the credit of the general fund. But this law
Of last year designatcs no fund 1t simply
requires that the tax shall be for the use OF
The State" Is the phrase too general to be
operative
The matter is one of large public interest
If the courts sustain tie law thousands of dol
lars will be placed in the public purse which
otherwise will be lost to it, The Argus states
that in the test case brought by the District
Attorney of Albany County Attorney General
Brcn will appear TO aid that official in up
holding the constitutonality of the act.