Democratic Sentinel, Volume 21, Number 51, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 24 December 1897 — [?]AXING WEALTH, NOT Section. [ARTICLE]

[?]AXING WEALTH, NOT Section.

Senator Turpie’s amend-' ment to the Tariff bill propose eB to'levy a tax of 2 per cent, upon the estate of every per** son who leaves more than $5,000 at death. The Chicago Tribune says: The object of this amend" ment is the same as that of unconstitutional income tax. Its supporters want certain sections of the country to be taxed much more heavily than others, not because the former are the more populous, but be" cause they are ihe wealthier. Nothing could be more absurd and untrue than this statement. The inheritance tax proposed would not be laid upon sections or states at all, hut upon property wher" ever found and with absolute impartiality. As estates are larger in New York than in Arkansas, for example, this tax would yield larger returns there thaß in Arkansas. But in the same way New York pays vastly more import duties than Ar" kansas, because New York imports and consumes vastly more dutiable goods. Again,the whiskey and beer taxes yield greatly more mons eyfrom Kentucky and Wis" consin than from Maine and Kansas. But this is not a dis" crimination between the stated means merely that some states make and sell more of the articles taxed than other states. To call such taxes discrim" inative between the states is a folly which, if carried to its logical conclusion, would for" hid all hut poll taxes. For For there was never yet any other kind of tax which could fall equally or according to population upon all the states. No existing tax does. The purpose of income aud inheritance taxes is perfectly simple. It is to make wealth bear some part at least of its just share of the burdens of government. Sooner or later that purpose will find expression iu effective law, even if a constitutional amendment must first be adopted. —. The delict occasioned by the Di >i ley bill baa left a big hole in i niin |t°^ P<rr BanU