Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1906-12-07

was shown in the investigation or the
snown since by the Investigation of the
tobacco and sugar trusts as to the initt-
ative, Of big railroads, OFTEN railroads.
preventing n big shipper from maintain
ing improper advantages at the expense
OF small shippers and of the general pub
| lie. Such n combination, instead of being
| forbidden by law, should be favored. In
other words, 1t should be permitted to
| railroads to make agreements, provided
| these agreements were sanctioned by the
Interstate commerce commission and
| were published. With these two condi-
| tions complied with IL Is impossible to
| see what harm such combination could
| do. TO the public at large: II Is public
incapable of full enforcement because
| both judges and juries realize that Its
| ness of the country; for the result Is to
| make decent railroad men violators of
the law against their Will ana ITO 10 pii,,, pHt
| wrongdoers. Such a result In turn tends
to throw the decent man and the wilful
| the end to drag down the former to the
| latter's level: for the man who becomes
a lawbreaker in one way nnhappily tends
willing to break 1t in many ways. No
| more scathing condemnation could be
| the words of the interstate commerce
commission when. in commenting upon
associations do Technically Violate the
law, they say: "The decision of the
| United States supreme court In the
Traffic association case has produced no
practical effect upon the railway opera
in fact, exist now as they did before
these decisions, and with the same gen.
eral effect In JUSTICE to all parties !, 81 we we
to see how our interstate railways could
be operated with due regard to the inter
without concerted faction of the kind af-
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., recommend
alton to this subject, and II you find the
opinion of the interstate commerce COM
mission justified, that you amend the
inheritance and Income Tax.
1t was expected that the president
would refer In some way to his belief
nous fortunes, and. he has done so by
recommending legislation for both in
ieves the government should impose a
graduated inheritance tax, and, If possi-
Bile. a graduated income tax. He says:
81 am we'll aware that such subject
as this needs long and careful study in
order that the people may become f1mil-
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 our nation nation
ing for graduated inheritance tax by
which a steadily increasing rate of duty
should be put upon all moneys or other
valuables coming by gift. bequest. or
devise to any Individual or corporation
Il may be well to make the tax heaey IVY
is remote of kin. In any event, in my
Judgment the pro rata OF the tax should
of the amount left to any one Individual
after certain point has been reached
1t is most desirable to encourage thrift
thrift and ambition is the desire on the
part of the breadwinner to leave his chill;
by making the tax very small on moder-
ate amounts OF property left; because us
SSeGt shSad be 60 to Phe he
itance of those swollen fortunes which
It is certainly of no benefit to this coun-
! There can be no question OF the eth
ical propr!ety of the government thus de-
. term!ning the conditions upon which any
, gift or Inheritance should be received.
! Exactly Ii. far the inheritance tax
would, as an incident. have the effect OF
, limiting the transmission by devise or
| gift of the enormous fortunes In question
II is not necessary at present to discuss.
, 1t is wise that progress in this directlon
should be gradual. At first a permanent
, National inheritance tax, while 1t might
, be more substantial than any such tax
| mas nltneTIO Decrl, HScu MOI
, either in amount or in the extent of the
: increase by graduation. to what such a
tax should ultimately be.
Inheritance Tax Constitutional.
r This species of tax has again and again
been imposed, altho only temporarily, by
the national government; Il wa, was tirst
| the makers of the Constitution were
alive and at the head of affairs. 1t was
2 | a graduated tax; tho small in amount,
| tba iDcrpaaad with the amount
left TO any Individual, exceptions being
E made in the case of certain close Kin. A
9 act OF July /, 1862 a minimum sum oi
= $1,000 in personal property being excepted
from .axa.ion, onord;ng dS to the remoteness
G OF kin. The war-revenue act of June 10
1883. provided for an inheritance tax OF OF
n any sum exceeding the value of $4,000
o the rate of tax increasing both in accord
: anco with the amounts left and In ac
: cordance with the legatee's remotenes'
i of kim The supreme court has held tina
n the succession tax imposed at the TIM
!. of the civil war was not a direct tax ou
o stitutional and valid. More recently th
), court. in an opinion delivered by Mr.
e Justice White. which contained an ex
n ceedingly able and elaborate discussion
9 OF the powers of the congress to impos
g death duties, sustained the constitution
9 ality of the inheritance tax feature OF Tn
e war-revenue act or 1885.
q Is Income Tax Constitutional?
h "In it's incidents, and apart from tn
: main purpose of raising revenue, al
= income tax stands an entirely differ
II cnt footing from an inheritance tax, be
], cause it involves no question of the per
d petuation OF fortunes swollen to an un
healthy size. The question is in IT
IS ment of burdens to benefits AS tn
It law now stands It is undoubtedly. diff
e cult to Cevise a national income ta
u which shall be constitutional. Blu
% whether it 10 absolutely impossible Is an
u other question; and II possible 1t is mos
Il certainly desirable. The first purely in
h come tax law was past by the congress
II in 1861. but the most important law deal
D ing with the subject was that of 1S9-
l. This the court held to be unconstitu
'r tonal.
70 "The question is undoubtedly very In
is tricate delicate. and troublesome. Th
e decision of the court was only reache
10 by one majority. 1t is the law of tn
& land, and, of course, is excepted as sue
IT and Loyalty obeyed by all good citizen
e- | NeuerIhelnss.. the hesitation eXidentl