Bacon v. Ranson, No. 32418.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
Writing for the CourtRagland
Citation56 S.W.2d 786
PartiesLANGSTON BACON, Appellant, v. JOHN R. RANSON, County Collector of Jackson County.
Decision Date31 December 1932
Docket NumberNo. 32418.
56 S.W.2d 786
LANGSTON BACON, Appellant,
v.
JOHN R. RANSON, County Collector of Jackson County.
No. 32418.
Supreme Court of Missouri, in Banc.
December 31, 1932.

Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court.Hon. Darius A. Brown, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

[56 S.W.2d 787]

W.A. Harnsberger, John L. Gaylord and John I. Williamson for appellant.

(1) Section 10115, R.S. 1929, as amended in 1931 (new Sec. 10115, Acts 1931, p. 366) conflicts with Section 3 of Article 10 of the Missouri Constitution and is therefore void because lacking uniformity. Sec. 3, Art. 10, Missouri Constitution; Sec. 10115, Acts of 1931; Anderson's Law Dictionary; 39 Cyc. 685; State ex rel. v. Switzler, 143 Mo. 333; State v. Bengsch, 170 Mo. 115; Wire Co. v. Wollbrinck, 275 Mo. 357; Acts of 1931, pp. 366-7; State ex rel. v. Shipman, 234 S.W. 62; Independence v. Gates, 110 Mo. 382. (2) The Income Tax Act as amended is invalid because in conflict with Section 4, of Article 10, of the Constitution. Sec. 4, Art. 10, Mo. Const.; Wilson v. Beckwith, 140 Mo. 359; 50 C.J. 729; Pollock v. Farmers Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 596; Wire Co. v. Wollbrinck, 275 Mo. 355. (3) The Act of 1917, as amended, is in conflict with Sections 6 and 7, Article 10, Constitution of Missouri, and is, therefore, void. Secs. 6 and 7, Art. 10, Mo. Const.; Income Tax Act, 1917, p. 527; State ex rel. v. Shipman, 234 S.W. 63. (4) The Act of 1917, as amended, is void because it is in violation of Section 9, of Article 10, of the Missouri Constitution. Sec. 9, Art. 10, Mo. Const.; 12 C.J. 215. (5) The subdivision of the general subject of taxes on incomes into seven classes, based solely upon a difference in the amounts of the income in each class, is arbitrary, unreasonable and capricious, and therefore, void. State ex rel. v. Switzler, 143 Mo. 332. (6) The Income Tax Act of 1917, as amended, is in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, in that it deprives plaintiff of his property without due process of law and denies him the equal protection of the law. Smith v. Cahoon, 283 U.S. 566; A. & P. Tea Co. v. Maxwell, 154 S.E. 841; Clark v. Maxwell, 150 S.E. 192; Opinions of the Justices, 165 N.E. 900. (7) The Act of 1931 provides that if the rates therein fixed "be hereafter for any reason declared invalid or inoperative, then ... for the portion of the year, 1931, after June 30, 1931," the two per cent rate shall apply. The amendment thereby becomes contingently retroactive and is a delegation of both legislative and judicial power. Sec. 10134, R.S. 1929; State v. St. Louis, 2 S.W. (2d) 725; Nally v. Home Ins. Co., 250 Mo. 459; Merchants Exchange v. Knott, 212 Mo. 636; Mitchell, etc. v. State, 134 Ala. 409; State ex rel. v. Ashbrook, 154 Mo. 393.

Stratton Shartel, Attorney-General, Henry H. Stern and Denton Dunn, Assistant Attorneys-General, Martin, Scheuffler & Carbaugh, Norwin D. Houser, Paul C. Sprinkle and Inghram D. Hook for respondent.

"Brief History of Income Taxation," by Charles R. Metzger, American Bar Assn. Journal, Nov., 1927, Vol. XIII, No. 11, p. 662; Laws 1865, p. 112; Glasgow v. Rowse, 43 Mo. 479; Ludlow-Saylor Wire Co. v. Wollbrinck, 275 Mo. 339, 205 S.W. 196; Sess. I, ch. 45, United States Statutes at Large, Volume 12, p. 309; Pollock v. Farmers Loan and Trust Co., 158 U.S. 601, 39 L. Ed. 1108, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 912; Brushaber v. Union Pac. Railroad Co., 204 U.S. 1, 60 L. Ed. 493, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 236; Colonial Records of Massachusetts Bay Colony, II, 173, II, 213, III, 88; Const. of Mo., Art. X, secs. 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9; Art. II, sec. 15; Art. IV, sec. 1; Const. of the United States, Amendment XIV, sec. 1. (1) Sections 3, 4, 6 and 7 of Article X of the Constitution of Missouri are applicable only to taxes on property and have no application to income taxes. Wilson v. Washington County, 247 S.W. 185; Glasgow v. Rowse, 43 Mo. 479; Laws 1865, p. 112; Const. of Mo. of 1865, Art. I, sec. 30; Ludlow-Saylor Wire Co. v. Wollbrinck, 275 Mo. 339, 205 S.W. 196; Riesenberg v. Primary Realty Co., 214 Mo. App. 43, 258 S.W. 23; Elliott v. Winn, 305 Mo. 105, 264 S.W. 391; Young v. Illinois Athletic Club, 310 Ill. 75, 141 N.E. 369; Featherstone v. Norman, 153 S.E. 58; Purnell v. Page, 133 N.C. 125, 45 S.E. 535; State v. Railroad Co., 45 Md. 361, 24 Am. Rep. 511; Diefendorf v. Gallet, 10 Pac. (2d) 307; State ex rel. Sallic F. Moon Co. v. Wis. Tax Comm., 166 Wis. 287, 163 N.W. 639; People v. Wendell, 197 App. Div. 131, 188 N.Y. Supp. 348, affirmed 231 N.Y. 629, 132 N.E. 916; Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586, 26 L. Ed. 259; Michigan Cent. Railroad Co. v. Slack, 100 U.S. 595, 25 L. Ed. 647; Opinion of the Justices, 220 Mass. 613, 108 N.E. 570; Eliasberg Mere. Co. v. Grimes, 204 Ala. 492, 86 So. 56; Evans v. McCabe, 52 S.W. (2d) 159; Constitution of Tennessee, Art. II, sec. 28; In re Cupples' Estate, 272 Mo. 465, 199 S.W. 556; In re Zooks, 317 Mo. 986, 296 S.W. 778; State v. Baldwin's Estate, 323 Mo. 207, 19 S.W. (2d) 732; Express Co. v. St. Joseph, 66 Mo. 675; Kansas City v. Whipple, 136 Mo. 475, 38 S.W. 295, 35 L.R.A. 747; St. Louis v. Sternberg, 69 Mo. 289; City of Aurora v. McGannon, 138 Mo. 38, 39 S.W. 469; St. Louis v. Reilly & Woolfort, 6 Mo. App. 590; St. Joseph v. Ernst, 95 Mo. 360, 8 S.W. 558; St. Louis v. McCann, 157 Mo. 301, 57 S.W. 1016; City of Richmond v. Creel, 253 Mo. 256, 161 S.W. 794; McGrew v. Granite Bituminous Paving Co., 247 Mo. 549, 155 S.W. 411; State ex rel. Barker v. Merchants' Exchange of St. Louis, 269 Mo. 346, 190 S.W. 903, Ann. Cas. 1917E, 871, judgment affirmed Merchants' Exchange of St. Louis v. State of Missouri ex rel. Barker, 248 U.S. 365, 63 L. Ed. 300, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 114; State v. Weir, 145 Mo. 162, 46 S.W. 1099. (2) Section 3, Article X, of the Constitution of Missouri is not violated by provisions of the Income Tax Act as amended. Glasgow v. Rowse, 43 Mo. 479; Ludlow-Saylor Wire Co. v. Wollbrinck, 275 Mo. 339, 205 S.W. 196; Laws 1917, p. 528; R.S. 1929, sec. 572; Lawrence v. State Tax Commission (Advance Opinions United States Supreme Court, No. 13, 1931 term, p. 720, decided May 16, 1932); Stouffer v. Crawford, 248 S.W. 581; Ex Parte Asotsky, 319 Mo. 810, 5 S.W. (2d) 22, 62 A.L.R. 95; Const. of Mo. Art. X, sec. 3; State v. Becker, 288 Mo. 607, 233 S.W. 54; St. Louis v. Green, 7 Mo. App. 468; St. Louis v. Green, 70 Mo. 562; St. Louis v. Railway, 263 Mo. 387, 174 S.W. 78; St. Louis v. Sternberg, 69 Mo. 289; St. Louis v. United Rys. Co., 263 Mo. 507, 174 S.W. 109; State ex rel. McCluing v. Becker, 288 Mo. 607, 233 S.W. 54; Viquesney v. Kansas City, 305 Mo. 488, 266 S.W. 700; Northwestern Masonic Aid Assn. v. Waddill, 138 Mo. 628, 40 S.W. 648; State v. Guinotte, 275 Mo. 298, 204 S.W. 806; City of Aurora v. McGannon, 138 Mo. 38, 39 S.W. 469; Stanley v. Gates, 179 Ark. 886, 19 S.W. (2d) 1000; Featherstone v. Norman, 170 Ga. 370, 153 S.E. 58; Diefendorf v. Gallet, 10 Pac. (2d) 307; Standard Lumber Co. v. Pierce, 112 Ore. 314, 228 Pac. 812; In re Inman's Estate, 101 Ore. 182, 199 Pac. 615, 16 A.L.R. 675; State ex rel. v. Railroad Co., 138 Miss. 70, 104 So. 689; State v. Johnson, 170 Wis. 218, 175 N.W. 589; Waring v. Savannah, 60 Ga. 93; Hattiesburg Grocery Co. v. Robertson, 126 Miss. 34, 88 So. 4; Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U.S. 41, 44 L. Ed. 969, 20 Sup. Ct. Rep. 747; Flint v. Stone-Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107, 55 L. Ed. 389; Cook v. Marshall County, 196 U.S. 261, 49 L. Ed. 471, 25 Sup. Ct. Rep. 233; Nicol v. Ames, 173 U.S. 509, 43 L. Ed. 786, 19 Sup. Ct. Rep. 522; Brushaber v. Union Pac. Railroad Co., 240 U.S. 1, 60 L. Ed. 493, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 236; Black, "Income and Other Federal Taxes," sec. 55, chap. 3; Cooley on Taxation, sec. 1752; 26 R.C.L. sec. 124, p. 153; Egyptian Levee Co. v. Hardin, 27 Mo. 495; Washington v. State, 13 Ark. 752; McGee v. Mathis, 21 Ark. 40; People v. Coleman, 4 Cal. 46; Sohler v. Schneider, 49 Ga. 195; Home Ins. Co. v. Augusta, 50 Ga. 530; Slaughter v. Co., 13 Gratt. 767; Eyre v. Jacob, 14 Gratt, 422; Adams v. Somerville, 2 Hoad. 363; Aulanier v. Governor, 1 Tex. 655; Tex. Bank. Ins. Co. v. State, 42 Tex. 636; Wiggins Ferry Co. v. E. St. Louis, 102 Ill. 560; Walker v. Springfield, 94 Ill. 364; Ex Parte Robinson, 12 Nev. 263; Gatlin v. Tarboro, 78 N.C. 119; Boye v. Giradly, 28 La. Ann. 717; Walters v. Duke, 31 La. Ann. 668; W.U. Tel. Co. v. Mayer, 28 Ohio St. 537; People v. Hartwell, 12 Mich. 508; State v. Jones, 19 Ind. 356; Dishon v. Smith, 10 Iowa, 212; City of Newton v. Atchison, 31 Kan. 151, 1 Pac. 288; State v. Orvis, 20 Wis. 235; Baker v. Cincinnati, 11 Oh. St. 534. (3) Section 4, Article X, of the Constitution of Missouri is not violated by provisions of the Income Tax Act as amended. Glasgow v. Rowse, 43 Mo. 479; Const. of Mo. of 1861, Art. I, sec. 30; Ludlow-Saylor Wire Co. v. Wollbrinck, 275 Mo. 339, 205 S.W. 196; Express Co. v. St. Joseph, 66 Mo. 675; St. Joseph v. Spiegel, 75 Mo. 145; Ward v. Board, 135 Mo. 309, 36 S.W. 648; Mass. Bonding and Ins. Co. v. Chorn, 274 Mo. 15, 201 S.W. 1122; Viquesney v. Kansas City, 305 Mo. 488, 266 S.W. 700; Kansas City v. Richardson, 90 Mo. App. 450; American Co. v. St. Louis, 270 Mo. 40, 192 S.W. 402; Carthage v. Rhodes, 101 Mo. 175, 14 S.W. 181; Simmons v. State, 12 Mo. 268, 49 Am. Dec. 131; St. Louis v. Laughlin, 49 Mo. 559; State v. Bixman, 162 Mo. 1, 62 S.W. 828; St. Louis v. Green, 7 Mo. App. 468; State v. Parker Distilling Co., 236 Mo. 219, 139 S.W. 453; State ex rel. McClintock v. Guinotte, 275 Mo. 298, 204 S.W. 806; Laws 1917, pp. 237-242; State v. Freehold Investment Co., 305 Mo. 88, 264 S.W. 702; Hattiesburg Grocery Co. v. Robertson, 126 Miss. 34, 88 So. 4; State ex rel. v. Railroad Co., 104 So. 689; 27 L.R.A. (N.S.) 864; Const. of Mo. Art. X, sec. 4. (4) Sections 6 and 7 of Article X of the Constitution of Missouri are not violated by the Income Tax Act as amended. Const. of Mo. Article X, sections 6 and 7; Ludlow-Saylor Wire Co. v. Wollbrinck, 275 Mo. 339, 205 S.W. 196; Cooley on Taxation, sec. 1760; State ex rel. Atwood v....

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • General Am. Life Ins. Co. v. Bates, No. 42286
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • June 9, 1952
    ...if they operate alike upon all within the same class of subjects. See, among others, cases supra, and Bacon v. Ranson, 331 Mo. 985, 56 S.W.2d 786, 787[1-3]; Ex parte Asotsky, 319 Mo. 810, 5 S.W.2d 22, 25[3-5], 62 A.L.R. 95; State ex rel. People's Motorbus Co. v. Blaine, 332 Mo. 582, 58 S.W.......
  • Gibson v. Johnson, No. 30127.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 31, 1932
    ...and not stopped with those taking as by intestacy. The case law of the land on the proposition involved in this appeal is very meager, 56 S.W.2d 786 but the construction which we have placed upon Sections 525 and 311 is in accord with the result announced by reviewing authorities. In 18 Cor......
2 cases
  • General Am. Life Ins. Co. v. Bates, No. 42286
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • June 9, 1952
    ...if they operate alike upon all within the same class of subjects. See, among others, cases supra, and Bacon v. Ranson, 331 Mo. 985, 56 S.W.2d 786, 787[1-3]; Ex parte Asotsky, 319 Mo. 810, 5 S.W.2d 22, 25[3-5], 62 A.L.R. 95; State ex rel. People's Motorbus Co. v. Blaine, 332 Mo. 582, 58 S.W.......
  • Gibson v. Johnson, No. 30127.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 31, 1932
    ...and not stopped with those taking as by intestacy. The case law of the land on the proposition involved in this appeal is very meager, 56 S.W.2d 786 but the construction which we have placed upon Sections 525 and 311 is in accord with the result announced by reviewing authorities. In 18 Cor......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT