New-York tribune., 1903-02-02
A CASE FOR REASON.

II is a pity that ex-senator Ford cannot dis
cusS the franchise lax question without resort
to epithet and abuse, though his previous ut
terances on the subject mad prepared Us to ex-
pect that method OH his part. We are surprised.
however 10 note a disposition on the part or
Controller Grout to adopt the same tactics and
seek TO raise an issue of good faith in those who
propose some other scheme for corporate taxa
ton We think that they hurt themselves and
their cause by doing. The question Is one to
he settled by intelligent discussion, not by call
ing names. If franchise taxation along the lines
of the present law is sound in principle and just
in practice. it ought TO be perfectly possible TO
make the facts so plain to the people that pub
lie opinion would deter lawmakers from aban-
doninS it, If 1t is much better than alterna-
five plans for taxation of incomes, it should be
easy to demonstrate the fact so that those
proposing the innovation would have a hard
time to defend their position. Attacks on the
personal honesty of opponents, particularly
those in high station, merely serve TO obscure
the issue and relieve the persons attacked from
half the burden of defending their opinions on
their merits.
For our part we have long believed in the
principle of taxing franchises as real estate.
We supported the original Ford bill. and reg L
ted its amendment into a form of possible IN
constitutionality. We have had no occasion 10
change that view, and have as yet seen no H''.-
auate presentation of reasons for the abandon
ment by the State of a law which has not - far
had fair trial in operation. We hope hat
the Court of Appeals will soon decide in ar
mony with its late~chief judge, Robert E"rl,
that the law is constitutional on every point.
and that then it may be left to show It's merits.
Nevertheless, we are able to understand fIoE-
Those
tain questions which are a subject for reason
able discussion, Just as there may be a fair
difference of opinion about the policy which
they lead to. The Governor is confronted by
revenue problem. He must either discover new
sources Of indirect taxation for State purposes
or else impose larger State tax rate than last
year Whether that is an adequate reason foH
overturning the franchise tax system is open IL
question. Perhaps the gain is not worth the
sacrifice; but he thinks it is. and is entitled to
respectful consideration of his opinion.
So likewise, is he entitled TO respectful con
sideratiop when he says that q tax on gross
earnings would be a better and fairer tax than
one on franchises. We are not convinced that
it would be, and the Governor has not yet
taken occasion to elaborate his views and meet
the objections which have been urged against
them. The suspension OF all legislative activity
on the subject. pending the final decision by the
Court of Appeals, has made it unnecessary for
him to do So That inactivity has, we think,
been well advised. If after the legal questions
are finally disposed of new legislation seems TO
be in order we have no doubt the merits of
the matter will be frankly canvassed. The ques-
ton will be settled on merits, not on personali-
ties, and those who care TO take part in the dis
cussion will do well 10 prepare themselves for
appeals to intelligence rather than passion.