The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1895-07-24
AT IT AGAIN.
n SERIOUS QUESTION.
The Courts Once More Come to the
Defence of Plutocracy.

The Supreme Court of the State Of
Ohio is treading closely on the heels OF
the Supreme Court of the United
States. The latter declared that you
could not make the milliOnaires pay
any tax on their incomes during their
lives; and the former declares that an
Inheritance tax on the property OF the
rich is unconstitutional.
Here it is:
The act Of April 20, 1894, is entitled:
AN act to impose a direct inherit
ance tax 81 o. L. 166, by its exemp-
tion from taxation of the right to re-
ceive or succeed to estates not exceed
ing $40. 900 in value, and taxing the
whole right Of receiving or succeeding
to estates which exceed that sum In
value, and in taxing at higher rate
per centum the right to receive or sue
coed to estates of larger value than
to estates of smaller value, is in con-
f1ict with section 2 of the bill of rights
OF the constitution of this state, which
declares that; "All political power is
Inherent in the people. Government.
is instituted for their equal protection
and benefit" and the whole act is
therefore, unconstitutional and void.
Now think Of the utter shallowness
of this stuff. The constitution of the
state Of Ohio says that government
is instituted for the equal benefit and
protection of the people," and there
fore graduated Inheritance law is
unconstitutional!!
Is it not for the equal benefit and
protection of the people that wealth
should pay more than poverty; and
has not the law making power the
right to say where the line shall be
drawn?
Why all taxation ID on that basis.
The man with 10000 acres pays more
land taxes than the man with 10
acres; and the man with 10 acres pays
more land taxes than the man with no
acres. Will the court next declare
that you can't tax the 10000 acres un-
less the pauper pays the same amount?
The right to inherit property is
purely conventional and government
al. What right have the dead to con-
troll the living? II there was no gov
eminent, and everything was left to
general scramble, the strongest arm
would take possession of the prize. If
then the right Of inheritance is purely
a social arrangement, held under the
laws Of the land, who will pretend that
the same law-making power that regu-
lates the possession shall not prescribe
terms and condition?
Every day another slice of our liber-
ties is cut away, until our country be-
gins to look like the fatted OK at the
end of the barbecue:-theb bones of an
Gent traditions stand in grim mock
cry, festooned with remnants of rights
too insignificant to devour.
There is story of the lazy man who
let his manure heap grow. by gradual
accretion, until at last he held fami-
ly council to determine whether he
would move the pyramid of filth or
the barn!
The people of the United States will
soon have to decide whether they will
give up the courts, or give up the Re-
public. Both, it seems, can not live
together. The courts were meant to
adjudicate the disputes of private
citizens; not to constitute themselves
the ultimate governing power in the
nation. 1t is villainous usurpation,
without one word in any constitution
to authorize it.
While the people sleep the knaves
work, and before long we will wake up
and find no remedy but force: and Plu-
tocracy ready to meet force with force;
and our very resistance will be the ex-
cuse for greater aggressions.
For Gods sake friends, work among
your neighbors while it is yet day, for
the night cometh when no man can
work