Watertown weekly leader. [volume] (Watertown, Jefferson County, Wis.) 1906-1908, 1906-06-29
INHERITANCE TAX
LAW SUSTAINED
SUPREME COURT DECIDES ACT AT
FECTING MANY ESTATES
CONSTITUTIONAL.
AD VALOREM LAW is UPHELD.
Method of Taxation of Railroads Is Valid
but State Is Ruled Against in
Penalty Cases.

MADISON, Wis, June 22.-[Special ]
The state supreme court, late yesterday
afternoon, handed down decisions declar-
ing the inheritance tax law constitution
al, and also upheld the ad valorem and
the civil service laws.
The decision in the railroad penalty
cases went against the state. the court
deciding that the state could not recover
any $4,000 penalties, claimed as for
FIXTURES against the railroads for filing
false and untrue reports OF gross earn
Ings for purposes of taxation under the
old license fee system.
Justice Winslow wrote the opinion in
the inheritance tax case.
The constitutionality of this law, and
OF any similar law the court says, is
now attacked upon the following general
grounds:
That the right to take property by In
heritance or by will is a natural right pro
tected by the constitution, which cannot
be wholly taken away or substantially i'm
paired by the Legislature.
That the constitution of this state limits
the power of taxation to property only, and
that this tax is an excise levied upon right
or privilege, and hence unconstitutional.
That even If the Legislature has power,
under the constitution, to levy such a tax,
this law violates the constitutional require
ment that the rule of taxation shall be uni
form.
Text of Decision.
The opinion in part is as follows:
With the first of these propositions we
agree. We are fully aware that the con
trary proposition has been stated by the
great majority Of the courts of this coun
try, including the supreme court of the
United States. The Unanimity with which
it is stated is perhaps only equaled by the
paucity Of reasoning by which it is support
ed. In its simplest form it is thus stated
The right to take property by devise OF
descent Is the creature of the law and not
q natural right"
The fallacy of the idea that the govern
ment creates or withholds property rights
at will is very apparent. That there are
inherent rights existing in the people prior
is fact recognized. SO we arrive at the
conclusion that the general principle OF
Inheritance in taxation may be justified under I'd
alton of transfers of property.
Tax Law Scope.
The second contention is that taxes car
only be levied on property. So we meet
the question whether any taxes other than
taxes upon property can be constitutionally
levied In Wisconsin. There are no express
to property taxation.
Consideration Of the third point brings
us to the third point Of the argument, and
in fact partly answers 1t, namely, the OBJ
lection that the tax here in question VIC
lates the rule of uniformity. In view OF
our construction of section 1 Of article s
of our constitution, by which we hold that
1t applies simply to property taxation, the
question SEEMS to be free from reasonab BILE
doubt.
The progressive featur of the act involves
greater difficulty. By this feature increased
rates of taxation are imposed as the amount
Of the beQuest increases. 1t is said tina:
i- ic IL nriy oiy1ot hot :
no difference in situation justifying diff
ference in classification, and that classified
ton Of persons cannot be based on mere
differences in ability to pay. 1t IS some
what persuasive to note that railroad Ii
cense taxes have been levied upon the pro
gressive plan, increasing as the earnings
per mile increase, since 1876, without ques
ton, and that street railroads and electric
lighting companies are now subject to d
like progressive rate of taxation.
We are content to follow the decisions OF
the United States supreme court, and hold
that the progressive feature does not VIC
late the constitution.
Therefore, the demurrer is sustained ant
judgment dismissing the complaint ordered
Of Great Importance.
The case of Nunnemacher, as trustee
against the state of Wisconsin involved
the validity of chapter A. laws of 1903
which provides for a tax on the transfer
of real and personal property under the
interstate laws of this state when any
person dies possessed of property while
a resident of this state. Since the enact
ment of this law there has been paid
into the state treasury sums of money
amounting to 1924, 233.S7. A former
statute passed in 1899 was held uncon
stitutionaI by the supreme court. This
case, while only involving a tax of $4,000
really involved all of the taxes paid here
tofore under the act, for had the state
lost it would have been under obligation
at least of a moral nature. TO reimburse
those who have paid in under the law.
The case arose over the estate of Ed
ward B. Hull, a son-in-law of Herman
Nunnemacher of Milwaukee, who died
several years ago in France: His es
tate was probated in Waukesha county
and was among the earliest estates tC
which the present Inheritance tax law
applies. Mr.. Nunnemacher paid the tax
under protest and Immediately started q
suit against the state for its recovery
| The Pabst estate, the Schandein estate
and the property of several other wealthy
persons who have died within the last
three years are affected by the decision
in this suit, and the inheritance tax in al
these cases has been paid under protest