The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1893-03-01
BILL ARP.
atlanta Constitution.

| ing certain in the world but death and
taxes" but I didn't know that both of
these affections came together. They
don't in Georgia, and one of the comforts
of dying is to get rid of taxes, but it
seems that in some of the States and in
many foreign countries, the biggest tax Of
all is the death tax. Many of the States
have had an inheritance tax for fifty
years, but it didn't apply to children. 1t
affected collateral kindred oply-legacies
had to pay it, and all heirs who we're not
children of the deceased. But of late
years this death duty-this penalty for
dying, has taken hold of all estates worth
over $4,000, and the government takes
the first slice. This law is only two years
old in New York, Massachusetts and
Maryland, 80 far as children are concern.
ed, and it has not been heavy on collate-
raj heirs. A. T. Stewards estate paid on
ly SS0O,OOO. The estate of Mrs. Lennox
paid 100000, but if there had been chill
dren, no tax would have been paid. But
now Jay Gould's estate has had to pay
nearly million under the new law, and
there is a big fuss over it among the
lawyers and some of the preachers.
Seine of them say it Is right and some
say it is an outrage on human rights. In
England and France and Germany and
Australia and Canada this Inheritance
tax varies from ! to 10 per cent. on all
the estate in excess of 100000. The
idea seems to be that the deceased got
that excess without actually working for it
1t was interest upon interest or by specu
lation or good luck and all the time he
had the protection of the government,
and in nine cases out of ten, his profits
were somebody else's lessons and now
that he was dead, his heirs must pour
some of it back in the jug. They didn't
work for it and can we'll afford to let the
State take slice for the long years of
protection their father had. Perhaps,
that father, like Jay Gould, began the
world with nothing, and the children
would have no right to complain if the
State allowed them 100000 apiece and
took all the rest. This would be more
than liberal where there are no children,
for in the case of a. T. Stewart, Judge
Hilton gobbled it all up, and he was no
kin to Stewart. Sometimes very remote
kindred get the estate because that is the
law and that ia the reason have been
prospecting for thirty years to get my
wife's share of that 200, 100000 of pounds
that Sir William Holt left in the Bank Of
England. The prospect is mortal dim,
but there is some comfort in believing
that it is there and is still drawing inter.
est like my Confederate bonds.
But the question of how much shall
man be allowed to accumulate and keep
is looming up and will have to be settled
before long by American people. For the
safety of the Republic there will have to
be Limitation of some sort. John Stew
art Mill says it will have to be done.
Andrew Carnegie says the State ought to
take one-balf of all that a millionaire
leaves behind him and this law would
force him to divide out before he dieda
induce him to make his gifts to public
charities and colleges, while in life, like
Rockefeller and Armour are doing now and
like Peter Cooper and Peabody and 9th
ers did.
The Illinois Bar Association has de-
clared in favor of Limitation upon wealth,
and Mr.. Stead says the time is near at
hand when the children's inheritance
vii. be limited to eum that will give
esch an income of 100000 and no more.
1t would make about $3,OO0,0OO to do
that at 8 per cent. That law would give
jaw Goulds children S120O0,0O0, which
is enough, l reckon. to support them.
The other s6O,OOO,OOO would go to the
State for hospitals and homes for the poor
and the unfortunate. But if that had
been the law, Jay Gould would have di-
vided his property long ago and so dodg-
ed the law, or else he would have done
some big thing with it that would have
given him better obituary than he got.
A much better law than Mr.. Stead's
would be graduated tax not only on in
heritances, but on accumulations made
during life. If Mr.. Gould with $50, ,0O0,.
600 can buy up judges and legislatures,
as he boasted that he did, what could he
not do with 1OO,OOO,0OO or $500, 100000?
What could combine of twenty men do
whose holdings aggregate 81 ,OOO,OOO,0 900?
If combines of few millions can wreck
great railroad system like the Central,
what can these billionaires do? Before
the war there were but very very few rich
men, and they were afraid to scheme and
corner and combine, but they are multi
plying rapidly in the great cities. They
are absorbing the wealth of the naticn
and their methods are attracting public
attention and public concerts. Something
is going to be done. 1t will not begin
down South, for we have not suffered yet,
but the tendency of capital is that way
everywhere, aud the same evils will reach
us before long. There must be some lin
itation upon wealth. The joint estate of
the Astors is estimated at $3.50 1000
and most of it is in real estate in the city
of New York. Their chief income is
from rents and they can make the rents
exorbitant if they choose and defy COM
petition. Rockefeller comforts his con-
science with his gifts, but much of his
profits came from the wrecks of compel
ing companies that he crushed out of ex-
istence. If man ia making $40, 100000
year, it is The easiest thing in the world