FOREST TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES 555 
shoulders. The forest under transformation to sustained yield can be 
granted substantial relief through a reform in the tax system appli- 
cable to forest lands generally rather than to this special class. 
LAWS OF GENERAL APPLICATION 
An ideal forest-tax system will apply generally to all forest property, 
and forest owners will not be given an option as to what tax system 
shall be employed in connection with their properties. 
Most of the special forest-tax laws of the States are optional, the 
classification under the laws being initiated by application of the 
owner. If, under such conditions, all the properties eligible or 
the bulk of them are brought under the law, there may be reason to 
suspect that the law is granting special favors to this class of property. 
If only a few properties come in, it is evident that owners generally 
think they are better off under the ordinary tax system or do not in- 
tend to hold the cut-over land under either system. ‘This appears to 
be the situation with respect to most of the optional forest-tax laws 
that have been enacted in this country thus far. In no State which 
has a forest-tax option is there more than a negligible portion of pri- 
vately owned forest land classified under the optional system. 
A method of taxation which, as a result of its optional character, is 
actually in effect on only a small portion of the properties to which it 
applies can scarcely be presumed to have secured an equitable result 
or to have accomplished the purposes for which it was intended. 
Some owners may be ignorant of the option, others may prefer not to 
invite an invidious comparison with other owners by asking for special 
tax treatment, while still others may shy at the red tape involved. 
Certain other owners may use the option as a club over the assessor’s 
head, telling him, in effect, that if he does not reduce the assessment 
the property in question will be put under the alternative tax system. 
As a general principle, it would seem that if a certain tax system is 
worthy of adoption at all it should apply to all owners alike, without 
requiring them to take any unusual initiative. Only thus would it 
appear possible to accomplish any fundamental public purpose. The 
legislature should accept the responsibility for determining the best 
method of taxing forest property, in consideration of the public interest 
as a whole, and should then make its enactment of general application. 
This principle, however, should not be construed as opposed to every 
minor option which may arise incidental to the administration of such 
a tax law. 
CONTRACTS 
The great advantage of certainty as to the future burden of taxes 
upon forest property has caused efforts to be made in a number of 
States to deprive future legislatures of the power to amend existing 
tax provisions. 
It is a general rule that no legislature can bind future legislatures so 
as to deprive them of the right to amend or repeal any act of a previous 
legislature. The courts have, however, established the general princi- 
ple that when a statute embodies a contract with another party, the 
State may not violate its part of the contract by subsequent legisla- 
tion. This has appeared to offer a means by which existing forest-tax 
measures might be given immunity from change by later legislation, 
and in a number of States provisions have been embodied in forest-tax 
