The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-05-26
ARGUMENT is CONCLUDED
INSURANCE POLICY TAX CASE TAX
EN UNDER AMUSEMENT.
Points Brought Out by John A. Finch
anu Others on Both Sides
of the Case.


ing life insurance policies, was concluded
in the Circuit Court last night and Judge
Allen has taken the case under advisement.
The attorney general made the closing
speech for the tax commissioners. In re-
ferring to his predecessor and the tax law
of 1881 he said We've all heard that
Green Smith built the monument. We've
heard that he's the author of that tax law
of 1891. We've heard it said that Smith
has compared himself to Daniel Webster.
For a long time l wondered at this COM
parison and then / remembered that Mr..
Webster was the great expounder. But I've
also wondered if Mr.. Smith didn't get his
Boston men mixed up in drawing his COM
parsons and didn't mean John l.. Sullivan
instead of Mr. Webster. The attorney gen.
eral we know threatened he would make
Williams, the tax boards witness, sweat
and if it had been possible to paralyze
man with a glance Of an eagle eye there
wouldn't now be a grease spot left of VIII
liams. But does your Honor remember that
there wasn't a question put to that man
by Mr.. Smith that he did not answer with
out 'sweating? Mr.. Ketcham then read
from the office records of the attorney gem
eral.
Are the opinions of the attorney general
binding on this court?" asked Judge Allen.
when they meet the appreciation OF this
court he will decide as they are" replied
the attorney.
The attorney general quoted the Ian
guage from the report of the attorney gem
eral ending Nov. /, 1894, which read: Taxes
are revenues collected from the people.
They are burdens imposed by the Legsla-
ture. In imposing them it is of par
amount Importance that the taxation shall
apply equally to all. The policy of the law
is that every citizen shall contribute to the
support of the government in accordance
with his possessions" Following this quo
tation the attorney general held that all
property not exempt by the Constitution
is subject to taxation.
And l want to continue in the shoes of
my predecessor in that bold stand, sad
the attorney, and continue to impose taxa
ton that is just TO all. What was true IN
1881 of the State Tax Board Is true IN
1897 We are here defending that board and
insisting that corporate greed shall not fix
what shall be taxed. The State has
achieved d bad eminence, we are told IN
the insurance circles of the country ana
will climb higher in that direction II the
law is upheld. The State has achieved a
high place we contend, and there is hard
~ State in the Union that mas not writ
ten for our system OF taxation. Taxation Is
always burdensome. No man hurrles to
pay his taxes No system of taxation is
perfect and in the nature Of things cannot
be perfect but because we can't make
perfect system Is no reason We shall mar
and diStort the system we have.
The questions here are exceeding SIM
pie. They are not difficult to comprehend.
AS it seems to me they are easy of solu-
ton. The first is: Is a life insurance pol
icy-the interest in a policy, property? Not
what kind of property; but is 1T property?
Then the question is, does the Constitution
require the taxation of all property? Ii 1t
is true that the life insurance policy is
property and the Constitution requires the
taxation of all property, that settles the
question. 1t is a difficult thing to ascertain
the value of some kinds of property. That
is a question for the assessors to ascer-
tain. 1t is not the duty OF this court 1t is
your duty to find out what the law Is
There is no question here as to whether the
insured or the beneficiary should be
sessed. In Massachusetts they are required
to place the cash surrender value OF any
given period on the back of every policy
required to pay that. l have two policies
on my life that aggregate $1,000 get
dividend of $50 a year on them. Is not that
something of Value?
The attorney referred to the decision of
Justice Brewer in the Adams Express Com
pany case, in which the jurist held that it
did not matter of what the property con-
sisted 1t was enough that 1t was property,
had a value and produced an income. IT
you must go back to 1890 and 1891 and even
back of these years. Well sufficient to the
day is the evils thereof We want to decide
this question now and then we Will go PACK
to something else" AS the attorney gem
eral closed his argument the court asked:
do | understand it was the intent of the
Legislature to tax insurance policies? If
so, how do you account for the fact that
it has never been done?
"While it may not have been the lnten-
ton of any individual Legislature to pro-
vide for the taxation of insurance pol
cies," said Mr.. ketcham in reply, 1T is
not such individual intention that controls,
but the legislative intention of the whole
General Assembly as whole, and that in
tention must be ascertained on settled rules
81 ton iTOT inf r1llp h.lT
legislative bodies must be construed to be
in harmony with the Constitution and when
it is ascertained that the Constitution re-
quires the Legislature to provide Tor the
taxtion of all property the courts must con-
strue such as being the intention Of the
General Assembly"
Ex-Attorney General Smith replied to Mr.
Ketcham and closed the argument for the
plaintiffs. He could not understand, he said,
why the attorney general did not interpret
the Constitution according to better-dehned
principles.
MODEST GREEN SMITH.
Zone thing is true declared Smith; IF
1 can't build figures as fast as Ketcham, 1
can understand the law better than he can.
Now, what are they seeking to do with the
plaintiffs in this case? They are seeking
to deprive them of their property without
the law declaring against them They are
violating not only the common law, but
an agreement that came down from Magma
Charta. 1 call upon these men to point out
to the court where the law is that author
ICES the taxation of life insurance policies.
The power to tax is q legislative power.
The Legislature of the State is strong
enough to tax life insurance policies If it
chooses TO do so. 1t provide a dozen
systems by which the reserve fund of the
New York Life can be taxed and the holder
of that interest in Indiana can be made to
contribute to the expense of the state gov
eminent. The Constitution of Indiana does
not stand in the way of the Legislature to
do that nor does it command ii to do
property can be taxed. Cooley, on taxation,
says the way to exempt property is to omit
it. This is what the Legislature has done.
The Legislature did not deem it wise to
tax insurance policies. Such a thing par
takes too much of grave robbery-too much
of the ferret The Legislature is the State,
and it partakes of the sentiment of the
people of the State. Captain Shepard and
Mr. Ketcham boot at the doctrine that
England and France are encouraging their
ing them money to take care of this insur-
ance. But this is the very doctrine that
depletes the poorhouse and keeps men out
of the penitentiary. We live in an advanced
age yet We are told that this court Will
not notice what they are doing in England
l tell you, this court will note with pleas
urc what they are doing in the civilized
world. He will notice that if the Legisla-
ture by eXempting life insurance policies
can bring happiness 10 many homes it is in
who sneers at it is neither patriotic nor
honest.
The argument was resumed in the morn
ing by Silas NJ. Shepard who spoke for the
State Board OF Tax Commissioners. Taxa
ton he held, is a power inherent in the
sion, but nevertheless if the Constitution
commands anything, with reference 10 tax