New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-05-12
A TAX ON SUCCESS.
OPPOSITION TO THE INHERITANCE TAX
BILL GROWING.
CITY OFFICIALS AND PROFESSIONAL AND BUsI-
NESS MEN AGAINST 1T AND NO DEMAND
FROM OTHERS FOR IT-EFFECT ON
THE COMMERCIAL EMINENCE

OF NETWORK.

THE COMMERCIAL EMINENCE
OF NETWORK.
II is a long time possibly since opposition SO
sticng and determined levelled at any Dill IN
the hands of the Governor that which mas de-
veoped against the Graduated inheritance lux
bill. How a man Of the supposed inteihgehco anu
political sagacity of State Controller Roberts shouo
stake his chance OF a nomination ana e'eo"o" "
the highest Office Of the Empire State on meas
ure 50 ineouitable and unjust is something that the
keeneet politicians have been unable TO understand
Every day." said President Barker or the Tax
Department yesterday, men OF properly VINO co'he
into this ONCE on business tell that their ar
rangements are made and that II the ihher'tahce
Tax bill becomes law their place of residence VIII
be outside of New-York. a weH-known ciuZen,
who has paid the city personal assessments for
more than q quarter of a century, told me to-day
that II Governor Black signed this bill might be
sure that he had paid his last personal taxes in
New-York There is no question In my nina that
the worst possible consequences TO the PUBIC treas
ury await the enactment of this inheritance tax
The Tax commissioners of New-York see only a de-
pletion Of taxable property as the result or this
scheme. This can be readily accomplished either
by electing a change OF residence to another State
or the citizen may divide up his property among
his heirs before his death 1t is no secret that the
last-named method has been employed by more
than one rich man who died In this city recently
But the worst effect of this bill is that II would
drive out of New-York. to spend their money and to
pay their taxes in other States. people of wealth
who would under reasonable conditions remain
here pay their taxes here spend their money mere
and die here. The effect Of such q law is 10 drive
men of capital and their money out OF New-AoiA
No severer blow could be dealt the public treas
ury."
VICIOUS BILL.
Mayor Strong said yesterday that he had e*-
III. v>I,,tny he
troller Robertss proposition was made pubic tna'
II would result in HARM though good might De IN
tended -
1.-THE Graduated Inheritance Tax DILL co'i'iii"eu
the Mayor as the vicious bill that mas paeeou
the Legislature for long time. Inere Is ho soou
reason for its becoming a law. Inc present III"
has had a tendency TO drive some of our wealthy
people out of the city and get them INTO the haoi'
Of spending their money out OF the state ih's
drastic measure will drive many more away ana
cause wealthy citizens TO adopt FOR non es couh'i!
places out of the State that most OF them own IN
stead Of remaining residents Of New-York CITY.
hope that the Governor will discover the true facts
and will that the bill is opposed 10 the Dest
interests of people"
CORPORATION Counsel Scott said that the bill was
clearly IN the line Of Socialism and could not be de-
Tended any other line OF reasoning L have said
he advised against its becoming a law as pre5u-
dicial 10 the interests Of both the city and state
that have anything 10 add to my letters written
10 Governor Black several weeks ago protesting
against his permitting this Inheritance Tax bill TO
become law. The Governor, If he considers It's ef-
feet upon the prosperity Of the State. must refuse
20 approve such a bill Unless he desires 10 promote
the interests of adjacent States at the expense
of the people Of NewYork ne will withhold his sigma
MR. GUTHRIES OPINION.
William D. Guthrie. of the law firm of Seward
Guthrie Morametz Steele, has submitted an argu-
rnent 10 the Governor wherein shown many
pertinent and conclusive reasons why the Dill shouId
not become a law. In the first place Mr.. Guthrie
draws attention to the vast injury such measure
would do by driving capital TO other states. which
would work to the ultimate detrment OF all classes
whether farmer or mechanic. IN country or CITY Mt.
Guthrie asserts that the proposed tax would be I'M
constitutional II Is unequal in its operation
and does property the right of succession
upon any uniform or just basis. Taxpayers ne con-
tends cannot lawfully be divided into classes ana
assessed at different rates according to the amount
NJ nronerty owned by them. While agreeing that the
State may classify property and classify rights and
privileges Mr.. Guthrie draws attention to the fact
that tie question issue is not whether the Legls
lature may select particular class OF properly Ior
taxation but whether It can prescribe rules OF TAXA
ton upon Ike property like privileges which shall
vary according 10 the wealth of the owner II such
right exists. what protection. he asks, Is there
against spoaton or confscation at the will or ca
price Of the Legislature: and If the right TO dis
crrninate In the least exists. where Is the limit or
check or protection?
Mr.. Guthrie quotes precedents coming from the
highest courts In the land laying down the de-
cision that arbitrary selection never be 1usti-
fed by calling It classification, and that such
action Is expressly forbidden in the equal protec-
ton demanded by the Fourteenth Amendment In
Illinois for instance. the graduated tax, much
more reasonable than that proposed in the Dudley
bill was declared unconstitutional and void by
Judge Carter, who shows by reference to other
leading cases that any legislation with reference
TO taxation which does not tend toward equality
uniformity by u e his on,non
Judge Carter said: Believing as l do strongly. IN
The Fundamental idea of a tax-inheritance law and
OF the most satisfactory methods or taxatlon II is
with great reluctance that have been forced 10
the conclusion that the classification attempted IN
this law causes unjust discrimlnat9h Dei ti
tppon sound principles of public policy and that
the law must be held unconstitutional
ALL AGAINST 1T.
Matthew c. d. Borden. the we-known manu-
facturer of cotton cloth. when seen yesterday by
Tribune reporter in his office In Thomas-st said
there was no division OF sentiment among the
successful business men of the city to the In
heritance Tax bill with slight variations OF
expression" he said, "they all talk the same way
in opposition to the measure. II is simply one OF
the Legislature TO compel the property owners Of
this city pay nearly all the taxes OF the state
One cannot help wondering how far this system
OF robbing the city for the benefit OF the country
districts is 10 be carried. President Barker of
the Tax Department Is quite right in saying that
such measures will drive men OF means out or the
outside OF New-York. We are not compelled TO
live in New-York If we are 70 be unjustiy pun
ished for being successful Why do men engage
in business II it is to be successful and make
money? If they do not want TO make money they
might better keep out OF business altogether. But
this Inheritance Tax bill is designed not only 10
punish for being successful IN their business
but also 10 punish them the more according 10
the measure Of their success. 1--we IN New YORK
yet. but don't know how long shall continue TO
live here II such bill becomes law.
Richard Deeves the well-known and successful
builder, said in his Office. at No. 300 broadway: Il
nave held for long time that the state OF New
YORK cannot collect inheritance tax or personal tax
lairy and successfully. II simply drives rich men
ana wealthy corporations into other states When IL
UnQertakes cnllecf IL has already