Court Opinion

ID: 9418627
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 22:34:21.645724+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:07.187745
License: Public Domain

Me. Justice Holmes.
When a legal distinction is determined, as no one doubts that it may be, between night and day, childhood and maturity, or any other extremes, a point has. to be fixed or a line has to be dra wn, or gradually picked out by successive decisions, to mark where the change takes place. Looked at by itself without regard to the necessity behind it the line or point seems arbitrary. It might as-well or'nearly as well be a little more to one side or the other. But when it is seen that a line or point there must be, and that there is no mathematical or logical way of fixing it precisely, the decision of the legis-' lature must be accepted unless we can say that it is very wide of any reasonable mark.
There is a plain distinction between large loans secured by negotiable bonds and mortgages that easily escape taxation, and small ones to needy borrowers for which they give their personal note for a short term and a mortgage of their house. I hardly think it would be denied that the large transactions of the money market reasonably may be subjected to a tax from which small ones for private need are exempted. The Legislature of Kentucky after careful-consideration has decided that the distinction is clearly marked when the loan is for so long a term as five years. Whatever doubt I may feel, I certainly cannot say that it is wrong. If it is right as to the *42run of cases a possible exception here and there would not make the law bad. All taxes have to be laid by general rules.
I think that the judgment should be affirmed.
Mr. Justice Brandéis, Mr. Justice Sanford and Mr. Justice Stone concur in this opinion.