The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-05-15

levied on at the same rate throughout the
United States. The tax is hence uniform
throughout the United States. despite the
fact that different conditions among the
States may obtain as to the objects upon
which the tax is levied"
With reference to the objections to the
progressive feature of the law Justice
White said: 1.-The review which We have
made exhibits the fact that taxes imposed
with reference TO the ability of the per-
son upon whom the burden is placed TO
bear the same have been levied from the
foundation of the government. AS also
some authoritative thinkers and a number
of economic writer's contend that a pro-
gressive tax is more just and equal than
a proportionate one. In the absence of
constitutional limitation. the question
whether ii is or is not is legislative and not
judicial. The grave consequences which 1t
is asserted must arise in the future If the
right to levy progressive tax be recog-
nized involves in its ultimate aspect the
mere assertion that free and representative
government is failure and that the gross
est abuses of power are foreshadowed un-
less the courts usurp a purely legislative
function. If a case should ever arise where
an arbitrary and confiscatory exaction is
imposed bearing the guise of progressive
or any other form of tax. it will be time
enough 10 consider whether the judicial
power can afford a remedy by applying in
herent and fundamental principles for the
protection of the individual. even though
there be no express authority in the Con-
stitution to do so. That the law which we
have construed affords no ground for the
contention that the tax imposed is arbi-
trary and confiscatory is obvious
COURT BELOW ERRED.
Concluding he said 'It follows from the
foregoing opinion that the court below
erred i'm denying relief and that ii should
have held the plaintiff entitled to recover
so much of the tax as resulted from tax
ing legacies below $4,000 and from increas-
ing the tax rate with reference. TO the
whole amount of the personal estate OF
the deceased from which the legacies or
distributive shares were derived
Justice Brewer dissented on the ground
that the progressive feature Of tax Is
violation of uniformity" but concurred
on all other points.
Other cases decided by Justice White are
as follows: High VS.. Coyne appeal from
decision Of the United States Court for the
Northern district of Illinois, and the FL
deity Insurance Trust and Safe Deposit
Company VS.. McClain. in error to the
United States Circuit Court for the East
ern district of Pennsylvania.
In the case involving the right TO tax
inheritances consisting of government
bonds, which were handled in an opinion
handed down by Justice Shiras, the court
said: 1--WE think the conclusion fairly Ia
be drawn from the State and federal cases
is that the right to take property by will
or descent is derived from and regulated by
municipal law; that in assessing tax upon
such right or privilege the State may law
fully measure or fix the amount of the tax
by referring to the value of the property
passing; and that the incidental fact tina,
such property is composed in whole or In
part of federal securities does not invali-
date the tax or the law under which il is
imposed"
This opinion was rendered in the case OF
Plummer VS.. Controller Color, of the city
ol Nc" Ioi hs oiio iiTfo4sSN e+i~ ON~'eN - "
of New York. Justice Shiras also handed
down the opinion of the court in the case
of George 7. Murdock and others VS.. Col
lector Ward, from the Circuit Court OF
Appeals for the Southern district of New
York, and of George Sherman VS.. the
United States, from the Northern district
of New York, all involving the validity
of the national inheritance tax law as ap-
piled to estates composed of government
bonds.