New-York tribune., 1907-12-04

the whole estate. In France so much OF an IN
heritance as exceeds S10eoee0 pays over a
fifth to the state if il passes to a distant reia-
tive.
The German law is especially interesting to US
because it makes the inheritance tax an nm.
perial measure while allotting to the indivlduaI
states Of the empire portion Of the proceeds
and permitting them to impose taxes in ADDITION
to those imposed by the imperial government
Small inheritanceS are exempt. but the tax Is
so sharply progressive that when the inheritance
is still not very large provided il is agri-
cultural a forest land il is taxed at the rate
Of - per cent Il il goes to distant relatives.
There is no reason why in the United states the
national government should not impose inherl-
tance taxes in addition to those imposed by the
states. and when we last had an inheritance tax
about one-haif OF the states levied such
taxes concurrentiy with the national govern
ment. making a combined maximum rate IN
some cases as high p per cent The trench
law has one feature which is TO be heartily COM
nended. The progressive principle is so ap-
Piled that each higher rate is imposed ohy oI
the excess above the amount subject 10 the neXI
lower rate, that each increase OF rate VIII
apply only to certain amount above a certain
maximum. The should if possible be made
TO bear more heavily upon those reslding WIFI
out the country than within il. A heavy pro
gressive tax upon q very large fortune Is III
no way such a tax upon thrift or industry as
a light tax would be a small fortune. No
advantage comes either to the country as d
whole TO the individuals lnheTltlng the money
by permitting the transmission in their en-
tirety Of the enormous fortunes which would
be affected by such a tax, and an incident to
help to preserve a measurable equality OF OPP
pOrtunity for the people of the generations
growing TO manhood We have not the sllght-
est sympathy with that socialistlc idea Whlch
would try TO put laZiness. thrifuessness ana m
efficiency par with industry, thrift and ef-
f5ciency which would strive to break up not
merely private property, but what is far more
important. the home. the chief prop upon when
our whole civilization stands Such a theory.
if ever adopted. would mean the ruin OF the
entire county, ruin which would hear heav-
lest upon the weakest, upon those least ap!e
to shift for themselves. But proposals for leg1s-
Iation such this herein advocated are directly
opposed 10 this class Of Socialisic theories. Our
aim is to recognize what Lincoln pointed out
the fact that there are some respects in which
men are obviously not equal-but also 10 insist
that there should he an equality Of self-respect
and of mutual respect. equality Of rights be-
fore the law. and at least approximate equal
ity in the conditions under which each man
obtains the chance 10 show the stuff that is in
him when compared TO his fellows
\ few years ago there was loud complaint
that the law could not be invoked against
wealthy, offenders. There is no such complaint
The course OF the De
Enforcement Of partment Of Justice during the
the Law. last few years has been such
TO make il evident that no
man stands above the law. that corporation
is so wealthy that il cannot he held to account
TO proceed against the wealthiest malefactor
whose crime was one Of greed and cunning as
10 proceed against the agitator who incites to
brutal violence. Everything that can be done
under the existing law, and with the existing
state OF public opinion. which so PROFOUNDLY IN
fuences both the courts and jurieS, has been
done. But the laws themselves need strength
ening in more than one important point: they
should he made more definite. that no honest
man can be led unwittingiy to break them, and
81 that the real wrongdoer can be readily
punished
Moreover, there must be the public opinion
back of the laws the laws themselves VIII be
Of no avail. At present. while the average jury
man undoubtedly wishes to see trusts broken
up and is quite ready TO fine the corporation
itself. he is very reluctant TO find the facts
proven beyond a reasonable doubt when il
comes 10 sending to Jail member of the bust
ness community for indulging in practices which
are profoundly unhealthy. but which. unfortu-
nateiy, the business community has grown to
recognize welngh normal. Both the present
condition of the law and the present temper of
juries render it a task of extreme difficulty to
get at the real wrongdOer in any such case,
especially by Imprisonment. Yet II is from every
standpoint far preferable to punish the prime
offender by imprisonment rather than to fine
the corporation with the attendant damage to
stockholders
The two great evils in the execution of our
criminal laws to-day are sentimentality and
technicality. For the latter the remedy must
come from the hands of the legislatures, the
courts and the lawyers The other must depend
for its upon the gradual growth Of sound
public opinion which shall insist that regard for
the law and the demands OF reason shall con-
troll all other influences and emotions in the
jury box. Both Of these evils must be removed
or public discomfort with the criminal law VIII
continue
Instances of abuse in the granting of injunc
tions in Ia Dor disputes continue to occur, and
the resentment in the minds OF those VINO feel
that their rights are being in
lniunctions. Vaded and their liberty of ac
ton and Of speech unwarrant-
ably restrained continues likewise to grow
Much of the attack on the use Of the process or
injunction is wholly without warrant; but am
constrained to express the belief that for some
of it there is warrant. This question is becOm-
ing more and more one of prime Importance,
and unless the courts will themselves deal with
il in effective manner II is certain ultimately to
demand some form of legislative action IL
would be most unfortunate for our social wei
fare If we should permit many hohsst anu Il"
abiding citizens 10 feel that they had just cause
for regarding courts with hostfnfy. ear
nestlv commend to the attention OF the Congress
this matter. that some way may be devised
which viii limit the abuse of inJunctions ana
protect those rights which from time to time it
is often expressed with the use of the process
of Injunction by the courts, not only in IapoT
disputes. but where state laws are concerhea, I I
refrain from discussion of this question as
am informed that it will soon receive the con-
sidefation of the Supreme Court
The federal courts must. of course, decide ultl-
r,ateIv what are the respective spheres of state
and nation in connection with any law, state or
national. and they must decide definitely ana
finally in matters affecting individual citizens
| not only to the rights and wrongs OF laooL;
but as to the rights and wrongs or capital' ana
the national government must al"aEs see ,t ,n :
the decision of the court Is put INTO erect Inc
process of injunction is an essential adjunct OF
| the courts doing its work well; and as pre-
| ventfve measures are always better than RENE
d;.l the Wise usa of this process is from every
| Standpoint commendable- But where 1t is reck-
Iesslv or unnecessarily used the abuse should be
| censured. above all by the very men VINO are
| nronerly anxious to prevent any effort to smear
the courts of this necessary power. The court 5
| decision must be final; the protest Is only
| AGAINST the conduct of individual judges IN
needlessy anticipating such final decision. or IN
| the tvrannical use Of what is nomlnally a tenn
porarv Injunction to accomplish what IS IN TACT
| a r,ermanent decision
The loss Of life and limb from railroad acci-
dents in this country has become appalling 1t
| is a subject of which the national government
should take supervision. 1t
| he we'll begin by pro-