Charlevoix county herald. (East Jordan, Mich.) 189?-1953, 1906-12-15

STANDARD OIL company and as has been
shown since by the invesugaton OF tne
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
ic Such combination, instead or being
forbidden by inw shTHd he ee per@tted to
railroads to make agreements, provided
these agreements were sanctioned by the
were published. With these two condi-
tons complied with IL Is impossible 10
sec what harm such combination could
DO to the public at large. IL is pubic
evil to have on the statute books law
incapable of full enforcement because
both judges and turies realize that It's
full enforcement would destroy the busi-
ness of the country; for the result Is TO
make decent railroad men violators or
tho law against their Will, and to put
premium on the behavior of the wflful
wrongdoers. Such a result I'm turn tends
to throw the decent man and the wilful
wrongdoer into close association. and In
the end to drag down the former to the
latters level: for the man who be1ci-.es
a lawbreaker in one way unhappily 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
United States supreme court in the
Transmissssippi case and the Joint
Traffic association case has produced no
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 gem
ought probably TO add that 1t is difficult
to see how our interstate railways could
be operated with due regard to the inter
est of the shipper and the railway
without concerted action of the. kind al
forded thru these associations"
by the supreme court is such that tho
business OF the country cannot be cor
Quoted without breaking it. recommenc
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 curbing az enor-
recommending legislation for both in
come and an Inheritance tax. He be-
leves the government should impose
graduated inheritance tax, ard, If posi-
BILE. a graduated income tar lie says:
Il am well aware that such subject
as this needs long and careful study IN
order that the people may become tamll-
lar with what is proposed to be done,
may clearly see the necessity of proceed
ing with wisdom and self-restraint, and
may make mp their minds just how far
they are willing 90 go in the matter;
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 a law proVld-
ing for a graduated inhcritapce tax by
which steadily increasing rae OF DUTY
should DO put upon all moneys or other
valuables coming BY gift, bequest, or
devise to any individual or corporation.
II may be well to make the tax ne eiteg
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 n certain point has been reached:
1t Is most desirable to encourage thrift
thru and ambition is the desire on the
part of the breadwinner to leave ms emil
dren we'll off. This object can be attained
ate amounts of property left: because
the prime object should be to put con-
stantly increasing burden on the inner
itancs of those swollen fortunes whlch
| it Is certainly OF no benefit to this coun-
There can be no question of the eth
termining the conditions upon which any
gift or Inheritance should be received.
Exactly how far the inheritance TAX
would, as an incident. have the erect OF
| limiting the transmission by devise or
gift OF the enormous fortunes in question
| II is not necessary at present 10 DISCUSS;
| should be gradual. At first permanent
| national inheritance tax. while II might
| be more substantial than any such TAX
| has hitherto been, need not approximate
| either In amount or in the extent or the
| increase by graduation, to what such
TAX should ultimately be.
inheritance Tax Constitutional.
This species of tax has again and again
been imposed, altho only temporarily. by
| the national government 1t was first
by the act the T.
| alive and at the head of affairs. IT was
| a 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. n
similar tax was again imposed py the
| act of July /, 1862; a minimum sum or
| 81 900 in personal property being excepted
| from taxation, the tax then becoming
| progressive according to the remoteness
| of kin. The war-revenue act OF June 10,
| 1898, provided for an inheritance tax on
/ any sum exceeding the value or $lO,OUO'
| the rate OF tax increasing both IN accord
| nnce with the amounts LETT ana In ac-
| cordance with the legatee's remoteness
| OF kin. The supreme court mas neld tnat
| the succession tax imposed at the time
| of the civil war was not a direct TAX put
| an impose of excise which was both con-
| stitutional and valid. More recently the
| court. in an opinion deliVered py MT
| Justice White, which contained an eX-
| ceedingly able and elaborate discussion
| of the powers of the congress TO impose
| death duties, sustained the CONSTITUTIONS
| alitv of the inheritance tax feature or the
| War-revenue act of 1893.
Is Income Tax CONSTITUTIONAL
| ''In its incidents, and apart from the
| main purpose of raising revenue, an
| income tax stands on an entirely diner-
| ent footing from an inheritance tax, be-
| cause IL involves no question of the per-
| petuation of fortunes swollen TO an UNI
| healthy size. The question Is In its
| essence a question of the proper adjust
ment of burdens to benefits. AS the
| law now stands il is undoubtedly diff
cult to devise a national income tax
| which shall be constitutional. But
| whether IL is absolutely impossible Is an
| other question; and IL possible II Is most
| certainiy 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-
| tional. ,.,,- =,
| tricate delicate, and troublesome. The
| decision of the court was only reached
| nv one majority. 1t is the law of the
| land. and, of course, is excepted as such
| and Loyalty obeyed by all good citizens.
| Nevertheless, the hesitation evidently
| felt by the court as whole In coming
| to n conclusion, when considered to-
| rether with the previous decisions on
the subject, may perhaps indicate the
| possibility OF devising constitutional
49, tal n q n