The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-03-07
Mr.. Perry Belmont on Comptroller
Roberts's Inheritance Tax.

II will be remembered that Comptroller
ROBERTS has advised the Legislature of this
State to amend our inheritance tax laws 80
as to lay the following burdens on estates
OF 81 900, 900 and more Five per cent. on
estates Of one million and less than two
millions ten per cent. on estates of two
millions and less than three millions; tf-
teen per cent. on estates of three millions
and over" The objections to the proposal
are concisely and cogently set forth by Mr..
PERRY BELMONT in the March number of
the Forum.
The questions considered are these First,
would such a progressive inheritance tax
be lawful, and, secondly, would IL be eX-
pedienti Touching the first point, Mr..
BELMONT reminds us that a recent decision
Of the United States Supreme Court seems
to have rendered 1t res ddjudicdtd. The
case which brought out the decision was
the following Less than a year ago an in
habitant of Suffolk county, in the State of
New York, bequeathed all his property to
the United States Government. An in.
hcritance tax of nearly four thousand dol.
lars was levied upon 1t, and the levy was
upheld by the New York Court of Appeals.
Thereupon the United States, denying that
the property which had been given to the
Federal Government was liable to the tax,
carried the question TO the United States
Supreme Court, which, however, sus.
tanned the cXaction. In It's opinion that
court il reported to have declared that
the right Of n citizen to dispose Of his prop
erty by will has always been considered
purely a creature Of statute and within leg.
~islativc control. 1t added 1--WE know of
M legal principle to prevent the Legislature
from taking away or limiting the right of
testamentary disposition, or imposing such
conditions upon its exercise AZ 1t may deem
conducive to the public good" In view Of
this decision of the United States Supreme
Court, Mr.. BELMONT acknowledges that it
Is too late to contend that the Legislature
Of New York has not the power to destroy
the existing right of making a last will and
testament by taxing the privilege at the
rate OF 100 per cent.
But will the voters, he asks, ever choose
n Legislature that will exercise the poweri
He points out that n tax will not commend
itself to the public sense Of justice and
equity in an American commonwealth, IL it
be levied for any other purpose than the
raising OF revenue to meet Government cX-
penses. a tax which IL deliberately made
discriminating and disproportionatc in its
incidence is obviously levied for some other
purpose thar the mere raising of revenue.
The authors of the tax may consider the
purpose a good one, but Mr.. BELMONT sub.
mits that no purpose can be so good us to JUS.
tify inequality in the rate which shall sub
ject taxpayers to exceptional and invidious
eXactions, and to extortions in the name of
~texatlon. 1t may be said that those who
advocate an enlarged tax upon the right of
the citizen to control the distribution of his
property after his death, and an increasing
rate of tax AZ the thousands or millions m.
crease, do not propose to take away alto.
gethcr the right of bequest and Inheritance,
but simply to limit il in certain cases for
reasons alleged to be wise. The fact re-.
mains that the right is to he limited, and
limited for socialistic reasons chiefly, and
in the interest of u socialistic State.
The decisive objection to a progressive In.
heritance tax is thus stated by Mr.. BEL
MONT: "To place children in better cir.
cumstances than those in which their
fathers and mothers began life is the most
powerful OF the motives which induce par
ents of every condition to toll and save.
No motive for industry and sobriety can DO
more powerful" That motive would he
seriously weakened, should 1t DO known,