The diamond drill. (Crystal Falls, Iron County, Mich.) 1887-1996, 1907-12-07


amount No legislation can by any
possibility guarantee the business CON-
munity against the results OF specuia-
tive folly any more than II can guaran-
tee an Individual against the results OF
his extrnvagance. when an Individual
mortgages his house TO buy an auto
mobile he invites disaster. and when
wealthy men or men who pose rs such
or are unscrupuiously or foolishly eager
to become such indulge In reckless
speculation. especially II II Is accom-
panied by dishonesty. they jeopardizo
not only their own future. but the fu-
ture OF oil their innocent fellow citi-
zens. for they expose the whole busi-
ness community to panic and distress.
Can't Revise Tariff Now.
This country Is definitely committed
10 the protective system. and any ef-
fort to uproot II 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 country of such
phenomenal growth as ours Il is prob
ably well that every dozen years or so
the tariff laws should be carefully scru-
tinted 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 be as
minimum 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 IL. the diff
ference In the labor cost here and
abroad. for the well being OF the wage
worker must ever be n cardinal point
OF American policy. The question
should be approached purely from a
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 factional motives. The sole con.
sideratlon should be 10 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 presidential
election. because MS a matter OF fact
experience has concluslvely shown that
at such a time II is impossible TO get
men 10 treat II 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 aud an In
herltance tax should receive the care
ful attention OF our legislators. In
my judgment. both OF these taxes
should be part OF our system OF fed
eral taxation speak diflidently about
the income tax because one scheme for
an income tax was declared unconsti-
tutional by the supreme court, while In
addition II Is n difficult tax TO admin
lister In its practical working. and great
care would have TO be exercised 10 see
that II was not evaded by the very
men whom II was most desirable 10
have taxed. Nevertheless n graduated
be desirable feature OF federal taxa
ton, and II is to be hoped that one
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 10
decide as 10 the terms upon which a
man shall receive bequest from an
other, and this point In the deyolution
OF property is especially appropriate
for the imposition OF 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 n certain amount Is reach
ed tho bequest 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 tho bequest These principles
are recognized already In the leading
civilized nations OF the world.
Germany's inheritance Tax.
The German law Is especially inter
esting to us because II makes the in
heritance tax an imperial measure
whilo alloting TO the individual states
OF the empire n portion OF the pro
ceeds and permitting them to impose
taxes I'm addition TO those imposed by
the imperial government. Small inner
itances arc exempt. but the tax is so
sharply progressive that when the In
heritanco Is still not very largo. pro
vidcd II In not an agricultural or for
est land. II Is 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 add
ton TO those imposed by the states.
and when we last had an Inheritance
tax about one-half OF the states levied
such taxes concurrcntly with the m
tional government. making n combined
maximum rate In some cases as high
as Is per cent
To Tax Nonrosidents Higher.
The tax should II possible be made
10 bear more heavily upon those resid.
ing without the country than within II.
A heavy DfoQrpesfvo tax uDOn n very