White Pine news weekly mining review. [volume] (East Ely, Nev.) 1910-1920, 1911-01-08
MORE FUNDS ARE NEEDED FOR
RURAL SCHOOLS Of NEVADA

CNAAOOio. AhAc . tic HAAflAN&t u Aaa
ing property by succession or by in
h~eritance.
A tax on the privilege of receiving
property by inheritance or by will
has long been recognized as a legiti-
mate source of reyenue for the sup
port of a municipal corporation.
Succession and inheritance taxes
were recognized by Roman laws.-I
Gibbons Decline and Fall of the Ro-
man Empire. PIP. 1884. They lei
adopted in England in 1880. and
have been much extended since that
date, (Dowell, History of Taxation.
1857 and are now in force generally
in the countries of Europe. In the
United States succession and inheri-
lance tax laws were enacted in Pen
sylvania in 1926; in Maryland in
1874; Delaware 1869; West Yir-
ginia 1887; and still more recently
in Connecticut, New Jersey, Ohio,
Maine, Massachusetts, Tennessee,
North Carolina, New Hampshire,
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Vermont,
Michigan, Illinois, California, Oregon
and several other states. In fact Ne
vada is one of the very few states in
which these taxes are not now levied.
Upon general principles, the right
to tax the succession or inheritance
of property is founded upon a
reasonable basis, since the right of
any person to succeed to the property
of a deceased person. whether by will
of by inheritance. is a creature of
statute law. And the manner by
which crnh nrAtnarrv cho1l maze ig hv
no means a natural right. This idea
Is recognized almost universally in
statutes which provide the manner in
which property shall descend in the
absence of any will of the deceased,
and in statutes which regulate the
passage of property by will. AS the
right to succeed to the property of
a deceased person depends upon the
law of the state, 1t follows that the
state may regulate that right as pub
lie policy or necessity may dictate,
and may subject 1t to such burdens
and reasonable conditions as may
best subserve tkS purposes of the
state. 1t must be borne in mind that
this tax is not upon the property it
self, but upon the right or privilege
VI d1Qui III ~ ny SuItCoolOH. II 10
a condition upon which a person may
the estate of a deceased relative
by inheritance, or a testator by his
will. 1t is a retention by the state
of a part of the deceased persons
property, which the state may take
to meet its necessities, and which in
cases it may take in toto, as
in cases of escheated property. 1t is
not a tax on the right of alienation,
but on the privilege of receiving by
inheritance or will, or otherwise, at
the death of the former owner. There
Is practically no restriction placed
upon the state in the matter oil en-
forcing succession and inheritance
tax laws, nor upon the classification
that may be made of privileges for
purposes of taxation. In fact,
only restrictions eem to be that
the classifications shall be natural
and not arbitrary.
This doctrine is based upon a more
less extensive reading of the opin-
ions OF the leading jurists of our
land as set forth in the decisions of
recent cases, and it may be of inter-
est at this time to quote from some
of these opinions in order to show
how far the doctrine is being carried
and the principles applied.
In McGoun VS.. Illinois Trust and
Bank, 10 U. S. 2S3, the
court said:
THE right to take property by de-
wise or descent is a creature of law,
and not a natural right
a privilege"
Crane VS.. Reader, 81 Mich. "a,
(opinion by Judge Campbell:)
THE rules of inheritance are all
creatures of law. and, except as to
already vested. may b chang
ed and modified at pleasure. There
Is no such thing as a natural line of
inheritance independent of the law"
In Wallace VS.. Meyers, 38 Fed.
Rep. 1874, it was said to be lawful for
the state to withhold altogether the
privilege of acquiring property with
in its dominion by will or by inheri-
In Re Sherman, 153 N. Y. /:
1.-The state confers such right and
prescribes the rules of descent and
distribution"
Strobe VS.. Commonwealth, So Pa.
1S1, Ito the same effect.)
Considerable research has reveal
ed but one case in which a different
doctrine has been expressed, and in
that case, Nunnemacher VS.. State. 129
Wis. 100; l.. r. A. 121, it was held
that: THE general constitutional
guarantee of equality and equal
protection of the laws is not
infringed by an increased rate of
taxation upon Inheritance as the
amount of the inheritance increases;
And. That. A law taxing inheritances
may properly fix a different rate in
case of collateral relative and strang-
ers from that employed in case of
lineal relations"
The California courts have upheld
the succession tax law of thai state
under the most adverse circumstan-
ces that a be presented. One of
the leading cases, in Re Stanford's
Estate, So Pac. involves many of the
vital points of this law and sets forth