New Ulm review., 1912-11-06


\ principle. It II also believed that the
existence of . county aSsessOr will
act as q stimulant to these boards tC
do their work with greater care and
thoroughness.
Another objection to the bill Is that
lit creates new Office and will result
in increased expense to the county
It is true that 1t creates some S6 new
Offices, and also that 1t abolishes some
$500 of existing Offices. Whether !,
will result in increased expense to
the counties is problematical. In
some counties it may do so. and IN
others it may not. In any event the
increase, If it results at all, will not
be very large. If the town assessors
were being paid fair compensation
at the present time it is believed that
the county assessor would not cost
any more than the local assessors
would cost.
At all events the benefits which
would result from fairer and more
uniform assessment would far out
weigh the increased cost thereof, il
such there should be.
In order that taxation may be fair
as between the individual taxpayers
of the state 1t is essential that the
assessments of their property should
be relatively equal II the assess
ments are unfair, the taxes based up
on such assessments are inevitably
unequal You cannot erect substan-
~ ofryp Ofu ro
upon a "wobbly" foundation.
While it is not claimed that the
county assessorship system would in
all cases produce an absolutely per-
feet assessment, it is believed that
it would greatly tend to that desirable
result. It certainly is an attempt to
better present conditions. and while
in this state it may be something of
an experiment, we must remember
that all progress must in the begin
ming be experimental-that no one
can move forward if he doggedly in
sists upon remaining immOvable
The; Inheritance Tax.
In addition to the general property
tax. the gross earnings tax, ths mort
gage registry tax, and the three mill
tax on money and credits, which have
been already covered in these arti-
cles, the state imposes certain other
special taxes deserving of mention,
such as the inheritance tax, the ton
mage tax on vessels plying on inter-
waters, the bushel tax on
grain, and the liquor license tax.
The most important of these is the
tax. Although not in gen.
eral use in this country until COM
recent times the inheri.
.ance tax is not a new invention. It
vas employed by the Romans as a
part of their fiscal system before the
lawn of the Christian era and there |
s evidence that the Egyptians made
lse of it even earlier than the Ro-
mans. In many European countries
t has been in successful operation |
or centuries. !
From an economic standpoint no
ak has more to commend it and none |
S easier to defend. AS has been well
said: "This method of increasing
he public revenue is wise, simple
md effective-wise because it does
lOC LOuCQ private property Jul ing IHS
ife of the owner and thus places no
urden upon business activity; simple
,ecause the tax is easily ascertafned
nd collected while estates are being
administered in the probate court; ef-
ective because by the application OF
progressive rates, it adds no burden
o the poor but permits those who
ave much to contribute to the gov
somewhat in proportion to
heir ability to pay. It invades no
atural rights. It violates no maxim
f the law. It overleaps no consti-
utional barriers: It is neither revolu-
ionary nor socialistic, but is, on the
ontrary, a measure Of practical wis.
ON and social justice, and has been
ruly styled an institution of democ.
acy'"
ures have stamped the inheritance
Ak with their approval. The first in.
eritance tax law, enacted in 1885.
yas declared unconstitutional by the
upreme court, as were similar laws
assed in 1897, 1901, and 1902. The
fth attempt of the legislature to tax
1herltances, Chapter 2SS, Laws of
9O5, was successful being sustained
Y the supreme court in test case.
The present law imposes tax up