The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1907-12-05

I isaet can Only accomplish ctFtAifl
amount No legislation can by any
I possibility guarantee the business com.
nunity against the results af speeaa
live folly any more than Il eau guamn.
( Zee All indlyiluAl against the results OF
+ his extravaganza When nn individual
I mortgages bis bouse 60 buy an auto.
Y mobile he Invites disaster. aud When
4 wealthy mcn or men who pose as such
or are unscrupulously OF foolishly eager
ID become such indulge In reckless
speculation especially II Il Is accom-
pauied by dishonesty, they jeopardize
not only their own future, but the fu.
ture OF all their Innocent fellow citi.
gems, for they expose the whole bust.
ness community TO panic and distress.
Can't Revise Tariff Now,
This country is definitely committed
10 the protective system. aud any ef.
fort to uproot II could not but cause
I widespread Industrial disaster. In
other words. the principle OF the pres.
ent tariff law could not with wisdom
/ he changed But In a country OF such
/ phenomenal growth as ours II is prob
ably well that every dozen years or so
the tariff laws should be carefully scru-
\ tlnlzed SO as 10 see that no excessive
or improper benefits are conferred
thereby. that proper revenue is provid
ed and that our foreign trade Is en-
couraged There must always he as
minimum tariff which will not only
allow for the collection OF an ample
revenue. but which VIII NJ 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 well being OF the wage.
worker must ever be a cardinal point
of American policy. The question
should he approached purely from a
1 business standpoint. both the time and
| the manner OF the change being such
as 10 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
slderation 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 n matter or TACT
experience has concluslvely shown that
at such time Il 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 our tax laws are revised the
question of an income tax and an In
beritnnce tax should receive the care
full attention of our legislators, In
my Judgment, both OF these taxes
should be part of our system OF fed
eral taxation. speak dlfiidently about
the income tax because one scheme for
an income tax was declared unconsu-
tutional by the supreme court, while In
addition 1t is a difficult tax to admin
lister In its practical working. and great
care would have to be exercised TO see
that II was not evaded by the very
men whom II was most desirable to
have taxed Nevertheless a graduated
income tax Of the proper type would
be desira BILE feature Of federal taxa
ton, and 1t is to be hoped that one
may be devised which the supreme
court will declare constitutional
The Inheritance tax, however, IL
far better method Of taxation. The
government has the absolute right to
decide as to the terms upon which o
man shall receive a bequest from an
other, and this point IN the deyolutlon
of property is especially appropriate
for the imposition of a tax. Laws I'm
posing such taxes have repeatedly been
placed upon the national statute books
and as repeatedly declared constitu
tional by the courts, and these laws
contained the progressive principle
that Is, after Il certain amount Is reach
ed the bequest or gift In life or death
Is increasingly burdened and the rate
Vi taAhtipu 10 iuSItuScu ~ piopoi'io"
to the remoteness of blood OF the man
receiving the bequest These principles
are recognized already In the leading
civilized nations of the world.
Gernany'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 inner
itances are exempt. but the tax Is so
sharply progressive that when the In.
heritance is still not very large, pro
yided II is not an agricultural or for
est land, II IL taxed at the rate OF %
per cent II II goes TO distant relatives.
There is no reason why In the United
States the national government should
not impose Inheritance taxes In addl-
ton to those imposed by the states,
and when we last had an inheritance
tax about one-half OF the states levied
such taxes concurrently with the ma
tlonal government. making combined
maximum rate In some cases as high
as % per cent
To Tax Nonresidents Higher.
The fay shofId N DossIbie be made