Northern Wisconsin advertiser. [volume] (Wabeno, Wis.) 1898-1925, 1906-12-06

shown since by the investigation of the
alive Of big railroads. Often railroads
would Ike to combine for the purpose Of
preventing big shipper from maintain
of small shippers and OF the general pub
nc Such a 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 1t is impossible 10
see what harm such combination could
evil to have on the statute books q law
incapable OF full enforcement because
both judges and turies realize that its
full enforcement would destroy the bust
ness OF the country; for the result il TO
make decent railroad men violators OF
the law against their will, and to put .
wrongdoers. Such a result In turn tends
to throw the decent man and the wilfuI
the end to drag down the former 10 the
latter,s level: for the man who becomes
a lawbreaher in one way unhappily tends
willing to break it in many -vays. No
more scathing condemnation couIa be
the words on Of the Interstate Is IN
commission when. in commenting upon
the fact that. the numerous Joint traffic
law, they say: THE decision Of the
United States supreme court in the
Iransmississippi care and the Joint
practical effect upon the railway opera
tons of the country. Such associations,
In fact, exist nov, as they did before
erd effect. In Justice to all parties, we
ought probably to add that it is dificult
to to see how our our interstate railways could
est OF the shipper and the railway
without concerted action of the kind az
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-
that you give careful and early consider
alton to this subject, and II 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.
1t was expected that the president
in the necessity for the curbing Of enor-
nous fortunes, and he has done so by
recommending legislation for both in
eV tR the ssod aaf m HE b,
graduated Inheritance tax, and, II posi-
bic, a graduated income tax. He says;
am well aware that such a subject
as this needs long and careful study in
order that the people may become famil-
iar with what Is proposed to be done.
ing with wisdom and self-restralnt, and
may make up their minds just how far
tney are wiling 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 law trovid-
ing. for graduated inheritance tax by
which steadily increasing rate of duty
should be put upon all moneys or other
Ssyise f9 s coming BY gift 6eauest or
II 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 thf increase
OF the amount left to any one individual
after certain point has been reached.
IL IS most desirable to encourage thrift
and ambition, and potent source of
thrift and ambition is the desire on the
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
stantly increasing burden on the inher
itance of those swollen fortunes which
II is certainly Of no benefit to this coun-
try to perpetuate.
There can be no question of the eth
ical propriety of the government thus de-
termining the conditions upon which any
gift OF inheritance should be received.
Exactly how 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
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 it might
be more substantial than any such tax
has hitherto been, need not approximate.
either in amount or in the extent of the
increase by graduation, to what such a
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 g. 1884, when
a nd n a IA n a IN I IVA
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 kim A
similar tax was again imposed by the |
act of July l, 1852. minimum sum of |
loco in personal property being excepted
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 of $4,000 |
the rate of tax increasing both in accord |
anee with the amounts left and In ac-
enrGance with the legatee's remoteness |
OF kim The supreme court has held that |
the succession tax imposed at the time |
of the civil war was not a direct tax but |
stitutional and valid More recently the 1
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 |
atty of the inheritance tax feature of the /
war-revenue act of 1898.
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
ent footing from an inheritance tax, be- |
cause 1t involves no question of the per-
petuaton of fortunes swollen to an I'M
healthy size. The question is in its |
essence question of the proper adjust
ment of burdens TO benefits. AS the |
law now stands ii is undoubtedly diff
cult 10 devise a national income tax
which shall be constitutional But /
whether it is absolutely impossible is an
other question; 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-
tional.
THE question is undoubtedly very In
tricate. delicate. and troublesome. The
decision of the court was only reached !
by one majority. IL is the law of the /
land, ana. of course, is excepted as such 4
and Loyalty obeyed by all good citizens
Nevertheless. the hesitation evidently
felt by the court whole in coming
TO q conclusion. when considered to-
gether with the previous decisions on
the subject. may perhaps indicate the
possibility OF devising a constitutional
fncome-tax law which shall substan-
Ali. Itch,