The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1912-03-02

JUUGE hALLtN D
 ADDRESS AT THE | BAR BANQUET Judge Edward F. Hallen delivered | the following interesting address al | the banquet Of the Bridgeport Bar As l sociation last evening.
 'I shall discuss briefly this evening the subject of inheritance taxes, one l that is of great importance to law 1 yers, and yet one that is comparatively | little understood. This is not in the least surprising, as the legislation on | the subject in the various states is a 1 chaotic mass.
 "The idea of an inheritance tax is
 now new, and it's origin is usually at tributed to Emperor Augustus, who established such a tax in Rome at the | beginning of the Christian era. It seems that even Augustus borrowed the idea from the Egyptians, and an 1 old Egyptian papyrus records the sale of property by an old man to his sons I at nominal price, apparently for the purpose of evading the inheritance tax i laws of that ancient time.
 "In the middle ages the inheritance l tax was represented by the relief and other charges under feudal tenure. These were often simply pretences for extortion, and were payments made to l the lord by the heir of a deceased ten ant on being admitted to the tenure. inheritance taxes in some form were adopted several centuries ago by prac- Q 10 nf O f1d in 1905 even Japan in the far East came under the standard. Japan has an exemption from payment of inher- itance taxes which is interesting and i unique and found nowhere else, and ! that is when succession results through death iii battle or through death re- suiting within one year from wounds received or sickness suffered in war waged in behalf of the beloved father land
 ''The fundamental principle of inner itance taxes is sound in theory, and taxation has come to stay. It has been advocated alike in platforms of labor organizations and in writings of famous mi.liOnaires. Andrew Carne-
 gie has declared himself fin favor of
 a high tax on inheritances, and he
 has stated that by taxing estates heavily at death, the State marks it's
  l aires unworthy life.
 ''In a New York lecture Carnegie said that, while there are exceptions to all rules, it may be set down that the almighty dollar bequeathed td children is an almighty curse,' and that no man has a right to handicap his son with such a burden as great wealth.
 "The underlying principle of inheri- tance taxes, however, has been bitter ly opposed in theory legislative consid-
 eration, and has been attacked as un- constitutional in the United States Supreme Court and in many of the State courts. The ablest argument that the tax is wrong in theory, which I have read, was made by Wm. D. Guthrie of the New York Bar, before a
 committee of the New York legisla- ture. Two of the points he raised were that the great danger of all dem
 ocracies is that one class votes the taxes for another class to pay, and that practically the whole burden of taxation can be thrown on a few rich persons. All arguments against the tax by MT. Guthrie have been without avail in permanently influencing legis-
 lation, and the policy of the State of New York in regard to the tax has been as grasping and as indefensible as any State in the Union, except per- haps Oklahoma
 Whenever the question has been properly presented, the highest Courts held that there is no valid constitu- tional objection to the taxing of in- heritance and succession. There is great conflict in the decisions on the methods of application of the tax, but the main principle is legally correct
 ''It has now become accepted that
 the right to succeed to property, whether by will or otherwise, is a. crea- ture of statute law It follows that the State may regulate that right as pub lie policy or necessity dictate. and subject it to such burdens and req serve the purposes of the State. It must be remembered that the tax is
 not upon property, but upon the right Or privilege of acquiring it by success sion.
 "The Supreme Court of the United
 States has upheld the constitutionality of inheritance tax laws, and in the
 case of Blackstone vs. Miller. 1SS U. s., has gone even further and disposed of
 the established and accepted legal fic- tion, which was based on a law of uniformity and justice, that personal property follows the domicile of it's owner.
 "T1he United States Supreme Court has cast aside in that case this time honored legal fiction in the following terse sentence: When logic and the policy Of the State conflict with a fic- tion due to historical tradition, the fIc- ton must give way
 "Since this pronouncement by the United States Supreme Court and since the legislatures of many States have
 become aware that they may levy this kind of a tax with impunity and all
 most without restrint, there has been mad rush by various State legisla-
 tures to mulct the estates of deceas sed persons. Most of the inheritance tax legislation is new, the acts in over twenty states having been passed dur ing the last three years. Many of these arc ill considered and objection
 able and to protect itself. Connecticut has features in its inheritance tax laws which are expressly retaliatory. "At each session Of the legislature in many States the rates Or exemp- tions are changed, apd too frequently the legislatures do ot know the scope
 Or meaning of the laws which they
 have themselves enacted. The bur
 den is thus placed on tax officers and Courts. Then the Courts interpret in a way that necesSitates amendment
 after amendment by successive legis- latures and the result is entire bewil- derment and chaos. The question of which States, for instance, tax the cor porate stock of it's corporations, when
 owned by a nonresident decedent, is of vital importance to lawyers, so that they may properly advise their clients.
 And yet, in the present state of law, this is a very difficult matter.
 Some Courts, it would seem, are