The Elbert County tribune., 1906-12-06

tobacco and sugar trustsD as to the initi-
would like TO combine for the purpose OF
preventing a big shipper from maintain
of s small mali shippers and Of the seneral sas pabe
lie. Such combination, instead OF being
forbidden BY law. should be favored In
railroads to make agreements. provided
these agreements were sanctioned by the
were published With these two condi-
tons complied with II is Impossible to
what harm such combination could
do to the public at large II Is public
evil to have on the statute books n law
incapable of full enforcement because
both judges and jurics realize that its
full enforcement would destroy the busi-
ness of the country. for the result is to
make decent railroad men violators OF
the law against their will and to put "a
premium ON the behavior of the wlful
wrongdoers Such a result in turn tends
wrongdoer into close association and In
the end to drag down the former TO the
latter's level for the man who becomes
n lawbreakeT In one way unhappily tends
to lose all respect for law and to he
willing to break II in many ways No
more scathing condemnation could he
visited upon law than Is contained In
the words Of the Interstate commerce
commission wheE, In commenting upon
the fact that the numerous john -raflic
associations do technically violate the
law. they. say: THE decision OF the
Transmississlppl case and the Joint
Traffic association case has produced no
lions of the country. Such associations
in fact, exist now as they did before
these decisions. and with the same gem
erai effect In justice to all parties. we
ought probably 10 add that il 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"
This means that the law as construed
by the supreme court Is such that the
business OF the country cannot he con-
1 tNsrN
that you give careful and early consider
alton to TINS subject. and II you find the
mission justified. that you amend the
law so as TO obviate the evil disclosed
Inheritance and Income Tax.
would refer in some way to his belief
in the necessity for the curbng OF enor-
nous fortunes, and he has done so by
accommodating legislation for both In
come and an Inheritance tax. He be-
lieves the government should impose a
graduated Inheritance tax, and. IL posi-
BILE, a graduated income tax. lie says
Il am well aware that such subject
as this needs long and careful study in
order that the people may become famii-
lar with what is proposed to be done
may clearly see the necessity OF proceed
may make up their minds just how far
they are willing to 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 n law provid-
ing for a graduated Inheritance tax by
which n 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
1t may be wen to make the tax heavy
in proportion as the individual benefited
Is remote OF KIN. In any event, In my
Judgment the pro rata of the tax should
increase very heavily with the increase
of the amount left to any one Individual
after n certain point has been reached
1t is most desirable to encourage thrift
and ambition and a potent source OF
part OF the breadwinner to leave his chill
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-
stnntly increas sing burden on the inher-
ltance of those swollen fortunes which
II is certainly of no benefit to this coun-
try to perpetuate.
ical propriety of the government thus de-
termining the conditions upon which any
sirt or inheritanee @ shoqi1 De received,
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.
1t is wise that progress in this direction
should be gradual. At first a permanent
national Inheritance tax, while 1t might
be more substantial than any such tax
has hitherto been, need not approximate.
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
imposed by the act of July 8 1881. when
alive and at the head of affairs. 1t 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. A
similar tax was again imposed by the
~ n I n mi in i'm nf
$1,000 in personal property being excepted
from taxation. the tax then becoming
progressive according to the remoteness
Of kin. The warrevenue act Of June 10,
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 ac-
cordance with the legatee's remoteness
of kin. The supreme court has 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-
court, in an opinion delivered by Mr..
Justice White, which contained an ex-
ceedingly able and elaborate discussion
OF the powers of the congress to impose
death duties, sustained the constitution
ality OF the inheritance tax feature of the
war-revenue act OF 1S9s.
Is Income Tax Constitutional?
I'm its incidents. and apart from the
main purpose OF raising revenue, an
income tax stands on an entirely differ
tIll ipoNluB from llhtIltdHtt lhNs De
cause ii involves question OF the per-
petuatlon of fortunes swollen to un-
healthy size. The question is in its
essence question of the proper adjust
ment OF burdens to benefits. AS the
law now stands it is undoubtedly DIM
cult to devise n national income tax
which shall be constitutional. But
whether 1t is absolutely impossible is an
other question: and If possible 1t 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 1884.
This the court held TO be unconstltu-
tional.
'''rhe question is undoubtedly very in
tricate. delicate, and troublesome. The
decision of the court was only reached
by 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 whole in coming
to conclusion. when considered to-
h Il LII.