THE RED FLAG.

MY DEAR MR. CATLIN:

CHICAGO, January 14, 1891.

66

the pet

I did not know that you were expecting an article from me on vanity" of bulls, Chicago policemen and millionaires. The very word flag means red as it comes from the same root as flame. C. Osborne Ward calls attention, you remember, in his Ancient Lowly, to the interesting fact that red in flags, emblems, decorations, has always been the color of the poor, the slave, the workingmen-blue and white the colors of the aristocracy; blue blood on earth, white-robed angels in Heaven. The red, white and blue of the American flag has a hospitible democracy in its mingling of the signs of classes that is good enough for me. But if any one wants to fly the ancient red cap of the slave as a banner I would prevent the proudest government on earth, if I could, from interfering with him. Discontent has a better right to a hearing than content. Every new civilization began as a discontent, and we can afford to tolerate the wildest dissents, from everlasting to everlasting, on the chance of hearing the voice of a Christ or an Emerson at intervals of a thousand years or so. The Chicago policeman who violates the domicile of a poor woman to tear down the flag which is her protest against the oppression of the weak by the strong, is only giving us a pitiful rehearsal of the folly of those who have been conspicuous and odious all through history—the successful protestants who deny to others below them the right to protest. It is the spirit opposite to that of Ruth, for it says: "My God shall be thy God."

I don't see how I can find time to write you an article on this subject, interesting as it is. I am up to my eyes in work.

SUCCESSION TAX.

BY CYRUS D. ROYS.

It is very commonly asserted that legislation is so regulated as to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. If this statement could be re-phrased so as to read, "the effect of legislation has been to make the rich richer and the poor poorer," I should be in full sympathy with it.

This result has not been obtained by any desire on the part of the rich to create legislation that would injuriously affect the poor; but, is the accident of a business life so imperative in its demands that it has no time to consider the wants and necessities of others.

I think it may safely be stated that the wealthy in America have a most profound sympathy with the poor, and would hail with delight any legislation that would beneficially affect their interests. But they have been so absorbed in the effort to accumulate that they have left the interests of the working classes to be protected by clergymen, philanthropists and professional legislators. It may safely be stated that those who have accumulated wealth represent a larger degree of intelligence than those who have not. In other words, accumulation, as a rule, represents an intellectual force which is capable of taking care of its own. The failure to accumulate, as a rule, represents that want of intellectual force which is able to protect and enlarge its own interests.

This intellectual force which is capable of accumulation, understands its own wants and necessities, and without any desire or purpose to injure others, it secures such legislation as will best advance the interests it has in charge.

The other, and negative element of society, has not the quick capacity to fully realize its best necessities. Nor has it the means or precience to secure legislation in its own behalf. To do this, requires a thorough knowledge of the conditions upon which organized society is based, and the methods which are best adapted to perpetuate it. Therefore, it is not strange that the effect of legislation has been to advance the interests of the rich, and not in any manner to improve the condition of the poor.

It is not possible to formulate a law which will operate as a universal panacea for the misfortunes of society. The best that can be done, is to

take up a specific wrong and right it. It has been a favorite lullaby song of politicians of every shade and complexion, that the luxuries of life should be taxed for the maintenance of government; so that those who are too poor to obtain any but the necessities of life should not be required to bear the burdens of the State. But no adequate effort has ever been made to formulate this expressed sympathy. On the contrary, the effect of our legislation has been to actually make the poor pay tribute to the rich. In other words, that class of securities which represents the surplus wealth of the nation goes largely untaxed, while the homes of the poor are taxed at their full value. Our assessors, as a rule, are neither worse nor better than other men, and in the performance of their duty, they see the home of the mechanic, and by ascertaining the value of adjacent property immediately mark it down at its full valuee-we will assume $1,000. It is a home accumulated by hard labor and sacrifice, and following the assessment role to the Treasurer's office, they go once a year with medley of coin, accumulated again by hard labor and sacrifice, to pay their tax on the full value of that little home.

abounds in

His surplus This home But he never

The assessor finds a man on the avenue whose home luxuries. It represents a mere fraction of his accumulations. wealth is laid up in safety deposit vaults in stocks and bonds. the assessor values at less than one-third its actual value. gets a glimpse of that surplus wealth which is laid up in the vaults of the safety deposit, and this goes untaxed. So that as a rule the entire accumulations of the poor are taxed at their full value, while only a mere fraction of the wealth of the rich pays its tribute to the maintenance of government.

It does not require any assertion to show that this condition of things is unjust. Nor should it require proof to support the assertion that the surplus wealth of a nation should bear its burdens, and the homes of the poor should be relieved of taxation.

That condition of society is always best where you can count the largest number of homes, and in a government like ours we increase its strength and perpetuity by so much as we increase the number of its homes. Every home creates an individual interest in the safety and perpetuity of the State. Therefore, it is the duty of legislators to encourage such honorable ambition. But, when out of toil and sacrifice, in sickness and in health, the poor are compelled to take their last dollar and lay it down at the foot of the tax gatherer as an additional sacrifice that they make to the maintenance of government, knowing that the adjacent vaults hold millions of untaxed securities-the knowledge of the fact does not encourage them in building or refining their homes. But distrust and unrest broods over their hearth-stone; and, if sickness or other misfortune creates temporary distress, the Socialist and Anarchist will find an easy convert.

This condition, therefore, is a specific wrong, and I believe that a Succession Tax is a specific remedy. The homes of the poor should never be taxed. There is surplus wealth more than enough to meet all the demands of the State. At present this surplus wealth is largely untaxed,

because under our present system of assessment it cannot be reached. Under a Succession Tax every dollar of this surplus wealth would pay tribute to the maintenance of government:

Our present system of assessments is crude, cumbersome, and so expensive as to be extortionate. It should be abolished. My present impression is that all taxes should be collected through the Probate Court. In this manner the salary of the assessor and his army of assistants would be saved. It would be no more expensive for the Probate Court to administer upon an estate of ten millions, than it would to administer upon an estate of as many thousands. At present we do not know when our property will be sold for some unknown or forgotten tax, or for some special assessment. We are all the time exposed to the voracious demands of the tax shark. I would abolish this possibility. I would levy no taxes upon a man's estate during his life-time. I would permit him to have the use of his accumulations so as to enlarge his business to any extent, and not burden him with the fear that his property will be sold without his knowledge; but, when he is ready to

"Wrap the drapery of his couch about him,
"And lie down to pleasant dreams."

I would have the estate pass into the hands of the Probate Court, and such an amount as would fairly represent the taxes he ought to have paid, if paid annually during his life-time, together with an additional per cent (for the purpose of meeting the deficiency occasioned by relieving the poor from all taxation), and when the estate is closed the Probate Judge can certify this amount to the County Treasurer to be covered into the general revenue of the State and municipality.

The objection has been raised that the surplus wealth cannot be reached and therefore a Succession Tax of this nature is impracticable. But, in my judgment, the man who raises this objection only asserts the fact that he himself has not given the matter sufficient thought to determine in what manner the end could be accomplished. It is a fact to-day that in administering upon estates the heirs can collect no dividends upon stocks until they have first been scheduled in the Probate Court and duly transferred by its order, and over the signature of the duly appointed administrator or executor.

This is true also with registered bonds. So that in every instance an estate which enters Probate must surrender all its stocks and bonds, and the Probate Judge may know to-day exactly what amount should be deducted from these to represent the tax which such estate should pay to the support of government. The larger class of bonds, of course, are those which pass by delivery. These need not pass through the Probate Court; but in all instances where the heirs can agree among themselves such bonds may be divided, and the Probate Court will be as ignorant of their existence as the assessor is. But this difficulty can be overcome by each State passing a law that all bonds shall be registered. And in such case the heirs can collect neither interest nor dividends until the entire amount has been scheduled in the Probate Court, and duly transfered by

its order. It will not require excessive ingenuity to devise other methods by which the entire wealth of an estate can be scheduled and the proper tax be deducted by the Probate Judge.

There is an additional reason why a graded Succession Tax would promote the public interest. Experience has taught the English people that the accumulation of large estates in the hands of a few was inimical to the best interests of the Kingdom; and for this reason the law of primogeniture has been so modified as to compel a more general distribution. We ought to learn something from another's experience and recognize the fact that rapidly accumulating millions in the hands of a few constitutes a menace to the State.