The river press. [volume] (Fort Benton, Mont.) 1880-current, 1907-12-04

Yet we must also remember tina.
ever the wisest legislation OH tie Sub.
ject can only accomplish IL cert
amount. No legislation can by ~ -,
possibility guarantee the business cn.l.
munity against the results of Sheet.
tive folly any more than it can guara.l.
tee an individual against the results of
his extravaganza. When an individual
mortgages his house to buy an auto
mobile he invites disaster. and when
wealthy men or men who pose as such
or are urscrupulously or foolishly cage
to become such indulge in reckless
speculation, especially if it is. accom-
panied by dishonesty, they jeopardize
not only their own future. but the fu-
ture Of all their innocent fellow citi.
zens, for they expose the whole bust.
ness community to panic and distress.
Can't Revise Tariff Now.
This country is definitely committed
to the protective system. and any ef-
fort to uproot It could not but cause
widespread industrial disaster. In
other words. the principle Of the pres
ent tariff law could not with wisdom
be changed. But in a country Of such
phenomenal growth as our 1t is prob
ably we'll that every dozen years or so
the tariff laws should be carefully scru-
tinized so as to see that no excessive
or improper benefits are conferred
thereby, that proper revenue IL provid.
ed and that our foreign trade is en-.
couraged. There must always be as a
minimum a tariff which will not only
allow for the collection Of an ample
revenue, but which will at least make
good the difference in cost Of produc-
ton here and abroad-that is, the diff
ference in the labor cost here and
abroad, for the we'll being of the wage
worker must aver be a cardinal point
Of American policy. The question
should be approached purely from a
business standpoint, both the time and
the ann Of the change being such
as to arouse the minimum of agitation
and disturbance in the business world
and to give the least play for selfish
and fractional motives. The sole con
sideration should be to see that the
sum total Of changes represents the
public good. This means that the sub
ject cannot with wisdom be dealt with
In the year preceding a presidential
election, because as a matter Of fact
has c~onclusively shown that
at such q time 1t Is impossible to get
men to treat it from the standpoint of
the public good. In my judgment the
wise time to deal with the matter is
Immediately after such election.
Income Tax and Inheritance Tax.
When II tax laws are revised the
question of an income tax and an in
heritance tax should receive the care
full attention Of our legislators. In
my Judgment, both Of these taxes
should be part of VI system Of fed
eral taxation. | speak efficiently about
the income tax because M scheme for
an income tax was declared unconsti-
%tutional by the supreme court, while in
addition it is Il difficult tax to admin
care would have to be exercised to see
that 1t was not evaded by the very
men whom 1t was most desirable to
have taxed. Nevertheless a graduated
income tax of the proper type would
be a desirable feature Of federal taxa
ton, and it is to bus hoped that II
may be devised which the supreme
court will declare constitutional.
The inheritance tax, however, is
a far better method Of taxation. The
government has the absolute right to
decide rs to the terms upon which a
shall receive a beQuest from an
other, and this point In the devolution
Of property is especially appropriate
for the imposition of Il tax. Laws i'm
such taxes have repeatedly been
placed upon the national statute books
and as repeatedly declared constitu-
tional by the courts, and these laws
the progressive principle
that is, after a certain amount is reach
ed the bcquest or gift in life or death
is increasingly burdened and the rate
of taxation is increased in proportion
to the remoteness Of blood Of the man
receiving the bequcst. These principles
arc recognized already in the Leading
civilized nations of the world.
Germany's inheritance Tax.
The German law is especially inter
esting to us because it makes the in
heritance tax an imperial measure
while alloting to the individual states
of the empire a portion Of the pro-
ceeds and permitting them to impose
taxes In addition to those imposed by
the imperial government. Small inher-
itanccs are exempt, but the tax is so
sharply progressive that when the in
heritance is still not very large. pro-
vided 1t is not an agricultural or a for
est land. it Is taxed at the rate Of %
per cen il it goes to distant relatives.
There Is no reason why In the United
States the national government should
not impose Inheritance taxes In addi-
ton to those imposed by the states,
and when we last had an inheritance
tax about onc-half Of the states levied
such taxes concurrently with the ma