The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1906-12-15

necessary element or our present mus
| trial system. It IS not possible completely
| to prevent it; and if it were possible,
such complete prevention would do dam
age to the body polite. What we need
is not yainly to prevent all combination,
but to secure such rigorous and adequate
| control and supervision of the combine
tons as to prevent their lnJuFing the
public. or existing in SUCH FORM as lneV-
itably to threaten injury-for the mere
fact that a combination mas secured
practically complete control OF neces-
stances show that such combination was
to be presumed to be adverse to the pub
lie interest. 1t is unfortunate that our
present laws should forbid all combina-
lions, instead of sharply discriminating
between those combinations Which do
evil. Rebates, for instance, are as often
was shown in the investigation of the
Standard Oil company and as has been
shown since by the investigation OF the
tobacco and sugar trusts as to the in1tl-
alive of big railroads. Often railroads
would like to combine for the purpose of
preventing big shipper from maintain
of small shippers and of the general pub
lie. Such a combination, instead Of being
forbidden by law, should be favored. In
other words it should be permitted to
railroads to make agreements, provided
these agreements were sanctioned by the
interstate commerce commission and
were published With 4 these Two eond =.
see what harm such a combination could
do to the public at large. It is a public
evil to have on the ssatute. BOOKS a law
both Judges and juries realize that its
full enforcement would destroy the bust
ness OF. the country; for the result IS to
the law against their will, and to put a
premium on the behavior OF the W1lful
wrongdoers. Such result IN turn tends
to throw the decent man and the Wlfful
Wrongdoer into close association, and IN
the end to drag down the former to the
latterts level: for the man who becomes
a lawhreaker in one way unhapp1ly tends
to lose all respect for law and to be
willing to break it in many ways. No
more scathing condemnation could be
visited upon law than is contained in
the words Of the interstate commerce
commission when, in commenting upon
the fact that the numerous Joint traffic
associations do technically violate the
law, they say: THE decision of the
United States supreme court in the
Transmississippi case and the Joint
practical effect upon the railway opera
tons of the country. Such associations,
in fact, exist now. as they did before
these decisions, and with the same gen
era1 effect. In justice to all parties, we
ought probably to add that it is difficult
to see how our interstate railways could
est OF the shipper and the railway
forded thru these associations.
This means that the law as construed
by the supreme court is such that the
business of the country cannot be con-
Quoted without breaking it. 1 recommend
that you give careful and early consider
alton to this subject, and If you find the
opinion of the Interstate commerce COM
mission justified, that you amend the
law SO as to obviate the evil disclosed
Inheritance and income Tax.
It was expected that the president
would refer in some way to his belief
in the necessity for the curling of enor-
nous fortunes, ard he has done SO by
recommending legislation for both in
come and an inheritance tax. He be-
lieves the government should impose a
graduated inheritance tax, and, If posi-
BILE, graduated income tax. He says:
Il am well aware that such subject
as this needs long and careful study in
order that the people may become faTnil-
lar with what is proposed to be done,
may clearly see the necessity of proceed
ing with wisdom and self-restraint, and
may make up their minds just how far
while only trained legislators can work
out the project in necessary detail. But
[ feel that IN the near future our nation
al legislators should enact law provo
ing for graduated inheritance tax by
which a steadily increasing rate OF duty
should be put upon all moneys or other
yaluables coming by gift, bequest, g, or
It may be well to make the tax heavy
in proportion as the individual benefited
is remote of kin. In any event, in my
increase very heavily with the increase
of the amount left to any one Individual
after a certain point has been reached.
It is most desirable to encourage thrift
ard ambition, and potent source of
thrift and ambition is the desire on the
part of the breadWinner to leave his emil
dren well off. This object can be attained
by making the tax very small on moder-
ate amounts of property left because
the prime object should be to put a con-
startly increasing burden on the inner
nf fortunes
it is certainly of no benefit to this coun-
try to perpetuate.
There can be no question or the eIn-
ica1 propriety of the government thus de-
tern1ining the conditions upon which any
gift or Inheritance should be received.
Exactly how far the. inheritance tag
would, as an incident have the effect OF
limiting the transmission by devise or
gift of the enormous fortunes in question
it is not necessary at present to discuss.
It is wise that progress in this direction
should be gradual At first q permanent
national inheritance tax, while 1t might
be more substantial than any such tax
either in amount or in the extent of the
increase by graduation, to what such
tax should ultimately be.
Inheritance Tax Constitutional.
This species of tax has again and again
the national government. It was first
imposed by the act of July 6, 1897, when
the makers of the Constitution were
alive and at the head of affairs. It was
graduated tax; tho small in amount,
the rate was increased with the amount
left to any individual, exceptions being
made in the case of certain close kin. A
similar tax was again imposed by the
act of July 1, 1862; a minimum sum of
81, 000 in personal property being excepted
from taxation, the tax me then becoming ing
of kin. The war-reVenue act of June Is,
1898, provided for an inheritance tax on
any sum exceeding the value OF $4,000.
the rate of tax increasing both in accord
ance with the amounts left and IN ae-
cordance with the legatee's remoteness
Of kin. The supreme court mas held that
the succession tax imposed at the time
of the civil war was not a direct tax but
an impose Of excise which was both con-
stitutionaI and valid. More recently the
court, in an opinion delivered by Mr.
Justice White, which contained an ex-
ceeding1y able and elaborate discussion
of the powers of the congress to impose
death duties, sustained the constitution
atty of the inheritance tax feature of the
waf-revenue act of 1888.
Is income TAX Constitutional?
s1n its incidents, and apart from the
main purpose ri raising revenue, an
income tax stands on an entirely differ
ent footing from an Inheritance tax, be-
cause it involves no question of the per-
petuation OF fortunes swollen to an un-
healthy size. The question is in its
ment of burdens to benefits. AS the
law now stands it is undoubtedly diff
cult to devise a national income tax
which shall be constitutional. But
whether it is absolutely impossible is an
other questions and if possible it is most
certainly desirable. The first purely in
come tax law was past by the congress
in 1861, but the most important law deal
ing with the subject was that of 1894.
This the court held to be unconstitu-
tiolSal.
ssThe question is undoubtedly very in
trieate. delicate, and troublesome. The