State v. Guinotte
Citation | 275 Mo. 298,204 S.W. 806 |
Decision Date | 28 June 1918 |
Docket Number | No. 20717.,20717. |
Parties | STATE ex rel. McCLINTOCK et al. v. GUINOTTE, Probate Judge. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Beardsley & Beardsley, of Kansas City, Martin E. Lawson, of Liberty, and John M. Atkinson, of St. Louis, for relators. Frank W. McAllister, Atty. Gen., S. E. Skelley, George V. Berry, Thomas J. Cole, and John T. Gose, Asst. Attys. Gen., for respondents. W. B. & Ford W. Thompson, Glendy B. Arnold, and Collins, Barker & Britton, all of St. Louis, amid. curiæ.
This is certiorari to the probate court of Jackson county. To our writ return has been made by certifying up the full record. The real point is the validity or nonvalidity of the 1917 act of the Missouri Legislature, commonly called the Inheritance Tax Law. Missouri Laws of 1917, p. 114. The title of the act reads:
"An act providing for a tax on the transfer of gifts, legacies, inheritances, bequests, devises, appointments and successions; providing for its payment and collection, establishing and enforcing liens therefor; providing the method of procedure for determining the amount thereof and liability therefor and providing for suits to quiet title against claims of liens arising by reason thereof and to repeal article 14, chapter 2 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri of 1909 entitled `collateral inheritance tax' and all amendments thereto."
The probate court of Jackson county, was proceeding under this act of 1917 in the estate of Robert McClintock, deceased. The court appointed one John A. Kurtz to appraise and fix the clear market value of each interest in the estate, which was done. By his will Robert McClintock, deceased, had devised all of his large estate to his wife, Mary H. McClintock, his son, Robert S. McClintock, and his two granddaughters, all of whom are relators herein. The said Kurtz found the value of the interests and fixed the taxes as follows:
The judgment of the probate court followed the recommendation of Kurtz, and it is this judgment which relators challenge here. They challenge this judgment and proceeding in the probate court thus:
This suffices to state the case.
I. Before taking up the things urged against this law, it might be well to see just what the law is in fact. Throughout it speaks of a tax on transfer of property. But the word "tax" has a broad as well as a restricted meaning. We must consider the act as a whole to get the legislative idea. It is clear from a reading of this law that the lawmaking power was impressed with the idea that the right of inheritance was not an absolute right, but, on the other hand, was a right which might or might not be granted by the state. It is also clear that the Legislature recognized its power to change and modify the law as to descents and distributions, for we have no constitutional provisions restricting the lawmakers in this regard. Whilst by the Constitution we are compelled to recognize certain common-law rules, yet we are not compelled to recognize them after the lawmakers of the state change or abolish them.
Inheritance of property is not an absolute or natural right, and is not a right which may not be abolished by the lawmakers. We mean by this that there is no constitutional provision in this state which would prohibit the lawmaking power from changing or abolishing entirely the law as to descents and distributions. That we have changed these laws (and radically so) is made apparent by our decisions. Perry v. Strawbridge, 209 Mo. 621, 108 S. W. 641, 16 L. R. A. (N. S.) 244, 123 Am. St. Rep. 510, 14 Ann. Cas. 92. If under the Constitution we can radically change such laws, we can likewise abolish them, and this on the theory that the right of inheritance of property is not a natural right, but one purely produced by the laws of the sovereign. In 9 R. C. L. p. 13, it is said:
The author has cited the numerous ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hull v. Cartin, 6706
... ... Mrs. Gearon died at Wallace March ... 25, 1937, leaving surviving her three sisters and a niece ... residing in the state of Washington, and a brother living in ... Minnesota. At the time of her death, decedent was 69 years of ... age. Mrs. Gearon had been a resident ... Cal. 274, 92 P. 643, 644; Dant's Executors v ... Cooper , 123 Ky. 359, 96 S.W. 454; State ex rel ... McClintock v. Guinotte , 275 Mo. 298, 204 S.W. 806, 808.) ... The legislature, in conferring the authority to make a will ... and have it admitted to probate, and the ... ...
- Enochs v. State ex rel. Roberson
-
State ex rel. Madden v. Sartorius
... ... (a) The taking of property by inheritance or by will is not an absolute or natural right, but one created by the laws of the sovereign power. The State may foreclose the right absolutely or partially, or it may grant the right upon conditions precedent. State ex rel. McClintock v. Guinotte, 275 Mo. 298, 204 S.W. 806; Shepherd v. Murphy, 332 Mo. 1176, 61 S.W. (2d) 746; Natl. Safe Deposit Co. v. Stead, 250 Ill. 584, 95 N.E. 973. (b) An inheritance tax is a tax upon the right of succession and is not a tax upon the property itself. In re Rosing's Estate, 337 Mo. 544, 85 S.W. (2d) 495; ... ...
-
St. Louis Union Trust Co. v. State of Missouri
... ... Roberts v. Benson, 142 S.W. (2d) 1058; Hull v. Baumann, 345 Mo. 159; Carmichael v. Southern Coal & Coke Co., 301 U.S. 495. And under Section 3 of Article X of the Constitution of Missouri: Brown v. State, 323 Mo. 138; State ex rel. McClintock v. Guinotte, 275 Mo. 298; State ex rel. Fath v. Henderson, 160 Mo. 190; Ludlow-Saylor Wire Co. v. Wollbrinck, 275 Mo. 339. Even retaliatory laws are generally upheld against the objection that they are discriminatory, and against other constitutional objections. Fire Association of Philadelphia v. New York, ... ...