New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-04-06
DIRECT INHERITANCE TAX.
CoNsTITUTIoNALITY OF THE PROPOSED BILL
DEFENDED.

o the Editor OF The Tribune
Sir: VIII you pardon me for making few sugges-
tons in answer TO Mr. Feeten's letter OF March ~
published in The Tribune of to-day, the recent bill
proposing to tax direct inhertances in this State
SO far the business of this particular tax Is con-
cerncd have collected during the last six months the
views and criticisms OF many newspapers and leading
law periodicals throughout the United States upon this
tax concerning which have been both professionally
and theoretically interested for some time With
hardly one exception l find that the consensus OF
opinion is strongly in It's favor. Not only is this so
with the press, but II Mr. Feeten will examine the
writings Of some OF most eminent political econo-
miss and 1urlsts Mills Smith and others, he will find
that they uniformly express themselves in favor OF q
tax upon direct heirs being Just and proper in every
sense. In recent letter to upon this subject, the
Hon. David J. Brewer, of the United states supreme
Court, well expresses the general sentiment when he
says: have often urged that Of the most just
taxes, and II it graduated in proportion to the
amount Of the property passing, think IL would be
most beneficial 1t would tend largely to prevent the
accumulation of properly in family lines and work
that distribution which is for the interest OF ALL so
Judge Earl says in the Matter OF Mcpherson, 104 N y.
SIT, NO tax can be less burdensOme and interfere
less with the productive and industrial agencies Of
society,"" SO much for this part OF Mr.. Feetens OBJ
jectiOns
But he says it violates Section Of the State Consti
tuition, providing that private property shall not be
taken for public use without Just compensation No
is given by Mr. Feeten showing why or how this
particular provision applies to public tax, excepting
that he urges generally that II the State may tax
take per cent Of the personal estate of those
the principle the state may take 20 per cent,
so per cent, the whole estate real and personal"
Aside from the fact that this objection may equally be
urged against any tax and that the Constitution does
not regulate the quantum Of taxes, Mr.. Feeten Will
that the courts have decided that the Legislature
has the power Of doing just exactly what he says e.
taxing property at s. 90 or so per cent. The rule
seems 10 be elementary that where the taxing power Is
concerned there bounds or limit TO It's exercise
except constitutional restrictions, hence the Legislature
may tax to the verge of destruction or confscauon IN
these respects the Constitution wisely leaves the taxing
power to the discretion OF the awmaking body, and IL
is abused, the people have their remedy at the polls
Judge Cooley, in his valuable work on taxauOD,
1876 page 4, says: An subjects, therefore over
which the sovereign power of the state extends are
in its discretion legitimate subjects Of taxation, and
this may be carried to any extent to which the
government may choose to carry it. In It's very
against abuse must be found in the responsibility OF
the Legislature which imposes the tax to the con-
SttuenCy who are to pay IT,
While it is true that this particular provision OF
the Constitution was not passed upon In the MCPHERSON
case the fair inference Is that the astute lawyers VINO
selves familiar with every constitutional oplecuon
they felt that it was wholly inapplcable to the
question Certainly If tax upon collateral nerS Is
Judge Earl, il is difficult to how tax OF similar
nature can unconstitutional because II includes direct
heirs Your correspondent will find, however, that
his views were urged and rejected under one OF
these statutes as early as 1866 in STROBE VS. Common
wealth. 81 Pa. ST., 1885, which case was referred TO
In the matter OF Mcpherson by Judge Earl. .
Notwithstanding that Mr.. Feeten seems to mnt
darkly that the existence Of this tax occas0ned the
downfall OF the Roman Empire, l firmly believe that
the time will come, not only in this state, but In
other states when this system Of taxation Will be
found comprehensive and cicacious as TO warrant
its universal adoption and, at the same time, the
total abolition OF the personal property tax now pre-
vailing. The latter tax everybody knows, Is In
practice ridiculous farce. If 1t has BEEN or can be-
demonstrated that the succession tax will produce
sufficient revenue, easily collected and equally imposed
there Is no reason why the system should not be
adopted as to both direct and collateral heirs and the
upon personal property RELOCATED to the realm OF
obscurity where it properly belongs. believe that
the enforcement Of the law about to be passed will
demonstrate the wisdom Of its adoption by the Legls,
lature. The tax proposed is small q per cent? ana
does not affect estates under $4,000 Moreover the
effect OF the law will be to reach much personal
property which now escapes general taxation, either
by the subterfuge or dishonesty of its owner, or
BY the operation OF exemption statutes, e., Govern
ment bonds and the like. $1,000
'''"' BENJAMIN F. DOS PASSOS.
New York, March 80, 1891.