mw"
V W i WRTK l""'
m
8
"'
interests of the employer. The employes are no
more to be trusted to act unselfishly and disin
terestedly than the employers. In their zeal to
secure a present advantage they may not only
do injustice but oven forfeit a larger future gain.
The strike, the only weapon of the employe
at present, is a two-edged sword and may injure
the workman as much as the employer, and evon
when wholly successful, is apt to leave a rank
ling in the bosom of the wage-earner that ought
not to be. Society has, moreover, something
at stake as well as the employer and employe, for
there can be no considerable strike without con
siderable loss to the public. Society, therefore,
is justified in demanding that the differences be
tween capital and labor shall bd settled by peace
ful means. If a permanent, impartial board is
created, to which either party of an industrial
dispute may appeal or which can of its motion in
stitute an inquiry, public opinion may be relied
upon to enforce the finding. If there is compul
sory submission to investigation it is not neces
sary that there shall be compulsory acceptance of
.the decision, for a full and fair investigation will,
in almost every case, bring about a settlement.
INCOME AND INHERITANCE
,; (From Mr. Roosevelt's Message.)
The question of taxation is difficult in any
country, but it is especially difficult in ours "with
its federal system of government. Some taxes
should on every ground be levied in a small dis
trict for use in that district. Thus the taxation
of real estate is peculiarly for the immediate lo
cality in which the real estate is found. Again
there is no more legitimate tax for any state than
a tax on . the franchises conferred by the state
upon street railroads and similar corporations
which operate wholly within the state -boundaries
sometimes in one and sometimes in several
municipalities or other minor' divisions of the
state. But there are many kinds of taxes which
can only be levied by the general government so
as to produce the best results because, among
other reasons, the attempt to imp'ose them in one
particular state too often results merely in driving
nLmtlon 0I:individual affected to some
other locality or other state.
tfo iTi1 national government has long derived
Its chief revenue from a tariff on imports and frote
an Internal excise tax. In addition to these ther?
is every reason why, when next our system o : tax
ation is revised, the national government shouTd
Impose a graduated inheritance tax, S if Pos
sible, a graduated income tax. ' P
The man of great wealth owes a neculiar
obligation to the state, because he derives Ipecia
advantages from the mere existence of the kov-
Hmenf' Eot 0nly 8hould he recognize this obH
gation in the way he leads his daily life and in
the way he earns and spends, his money but It
should also be recognized by thS way in which
nn ?ayS fr the Protectin the state gives h im
assume Sffftff3' ? is deSirable that hrihouTd
assume Tiis full and proper share of the burden
of taxation; on the other hand1 it is auitJ 5
necessary that in this kind S 'taxation l where
shoumi016 the tapay but U ttSS
should be clear recognition of the dancer of in-
augurating any such system save fin a spirit of
entire justice and moderation
,3heilev.er ?' as a PeP1 undertake to re
model our taxation system along the lines sS-
turSete?h JG mfke ifc clear lerldvel
MOTortfn0? t0 dIstribute the burden of
supporting the government more eauitablv thin
PooPrrran; on T ?? treat mL
eei"1ida,St snoh a subject as this
People may become 5? M the
posed to be done, may clearlv bat Is pro"
of proceeding with wistom anfl ?? necessIty
and may make un tlipfr 2?i ?d .s?lf restraint,
are willing to go X tt?J?t2?8 how far W
legislators caopiTn?Stpr; hile only tramed
detail. Bufi Si that ?"" in necessary
national legislates should tne.. Dear future ur
for a graduated inheritance a laJ Pding
Hy increasing rJ0 a Stead"
moneys or other valuables nSl?0 tut upon aJ1
quest, or devise to any iSSl, ig ?Y gift' be'
ation. It may be well to n.5 T?"?1 or corPor
proportion a, .the YndlvWuS f w ?, heavy ln
of kin. in any event in v??flted is remote
rata of the tax sSi w?y lud6ment, the pro
the incveLl TitllfJF? heavi with
dividual after a o.L???l eft any one in-
-5As?.wKsa&
The Commoner.
tion is the desire on the part of the breadwinner
to leave his children well off. This object can
be attained by making the tax very small on mod
erate amounts of property left; because the prime
object should be to put a constantly increasing
burden on the inheritance of those swollen for
tunes which it is certainly of no benefit to this
country to perpetuate.
There can be no question of the ethical pro
priety of the government thus determining the
conditions upon which any gift or inheritance
should be received. Exactly how far the inherit
ance tax would, as an incident, have the effect
of limiting the transmission by devise or gift , of
the enormous fortunes in question it is not neces
sary at present to discuss. It is wise that progress
in this direction should be gradual. At first a per
manent national inheritance tax, while it might
be more substantial than any such tax has hither
to been, need not approximate, either in amount
or in the extent of the increase by graduation,
to what such a tax should ultimately be.
This species of tax has again and again been
imposed, although only temporarily, by the na
tional government. It was first imposed by the
act of July 6, 1797, when the makers of the con
stitution were alive and at the head of affairs.
It was a graduated tax; though small in amount,
the rate was increased with the amount left to
any individual, exception being made in the case
of certain close kin. A similar tax was again
Imposed by the act of July l, 1862; a minimum
sum of $1,000 in personal property being excepted
from, taxation, the tax then becoming progressive
according to the remoteness of kin. The war
revenue act of June 13, 1898, provided for an in
heritance tax on any sum exceeding the value
of $10,000, the rate of the tax increasing both in
accordance with the amounts left and in. accord
ance with the legatee's remoteness of kin.
The' supreme court has held that the succes
sion tax imposed at the time of the civil war was
not a direct tax but jm impost or excise which
was both constitutional and valid. More recently
the court, in an opinion delivered by Justice White
which contained an exceedingly able and elaborate'
discussion of the powers of the congress to impose
death duties, sustained the constitutionality of
the inheritance tax feature of the war revenue l
act of 1898.
In its incidents, and apart from the main
purpose of raising revenue, an income tax stands
on an entirely different footing from an inherit
ance tax; because it involves no question of the
perpetuation of fortunes swollen to an unhealthy
size. The question is in its essence a question
of the proper adjustment of burdens to benefits.
As the law now stands it is undoubtedly diffi
cult to devise a national income tax which shall
be constitutional. But wheth'er it is absolutely
impossible is another question; and if possible
it Is most certainly desirable. The first purely
5c?imt w, law was passed b the congress in
1861, but the most important law dealing with
the subject was that of 1894. This the court held
to be unconstitutional.
Tfie question is undoubtedly very intricate,
delicate and troublesome. The decision of the
court was only reached by one majority. It Is the
law of the land, and of course Is accepted as such
and loyally obeyed by all good citizens. Never
theless, the hesitation evidently felt by the court
as a whole in coming to a conclusion, when con
sidered together with the previous decisions on
the subject, may perhaps Indicate the possibility
of devising a constitutional income tax law which
shall substantially accomplish the results aimed
at. The difficulty of amending the constitution
is so great that only real necessity can justify
a resort thereto. Every effort should be made in
dealing with this subject as with the subject of
the proper control by the national government
over the use of corporate wealth in Interstate
business, to devise legislation which, without such
action shall attain the desired end; but if this
fails, there will ultimately be no alternative to a
constitutional amendment.
(From the Madison Square Speech.)
The income tax, which some in our country
nav denounced " a socialistic attack upon
wealth, has, I am pleased to report, the endorse
ment of the most conservative countries in the old
nfaf JB Permaf?nt Pt of the fiscal system
of most of the countries of Europe and in manv
places it is a graded tax, the rate being hiffi
upon the largest incomes. England hSlonfde-
SS? Gnf TU the Income te for a constable
part of her revenues and the English commis.
sion is now Investigating the proposition toSge
from a uniform to a graded tax. S
I have been absent too lomr to nnonir muu
any authority on the puWIc segment in ttS
country at this time, but I am so convinced of the
VOLUME G, NUMBER
justice of the income tax that t fnn1
people will sooner or a JeSan, F? that
ment to tho nnnafitJ ::.-., .mana an am..
ment to the nnnRMtntw .i.!rnan.4
.,,-!- i-J ."''"'" !vuln Will snPHfw,r
il Posslbln
apportioned among the people X , n5?entob
their ability to bear t.hnm?f . '?.tSroP?'m to
amend.
authorize an income tiw ,??; . sPecifically
for tlm lntnn d 4-t. . , . x"'lKe It nnsalKu
for the burdens of the federal go JLW n
apportioned amontr tho ifa,"veinment to
their ability to bear them i is little T"?11 to
disgrace to our country tha whl 0 ? S",1,01 a
command the lives nf u i Jl- A is able to
"a s?1 t rZ:z:i
vvAAAiJci. ivtraiLii in nonr t-r -.i-
'vj
of the government winIr Zl 7Z.?tiQ Senses
If we can but repeal the laws which ,
men to reap where they have not qowniable
which enable them to garner into the r IZrZ
barns the harvests that belong to othern g
will be able to accumulate elough to n7akP Z
fortune dangerous to the country Spec?5 SrHf
lege and the use of the taxing powerfo PrK
gain-these are the twin pillars upon which nlut
ocracy rests. To take away these supports f and I to
elevate the beneficiaries of special legis ation t
of 'oSrTarty.1101163' Ught to be "he
And who can suffer injury by just taaUnn
SS1? JfTS aDd the S ofthSeffer:
sonian doctrine of equal rights to all and special
privileges to none? Only those whose accumula
tions are stained with dishonesty and whoso im
moral methods have given them a distorted view
of business, of society and government. Accumu
lating by conscious frauds more money than they
can use upon them-selves, wisely distribute or
safely eave to their children, these denounce
as public enemies all who question their methods
or throw a light upon their crimes.
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS
(From Mr. Roosevelt's Message.)
I again recommend a law prohibiting all cor
porations from contributing to the- campaign ex
penses of any party. Such a bill has already
passed one house . of congress. , Let individuals
contribute as. they desire; but let us prohibit in
effective fashion all corporations from- making
contributions for any political purpose, directly or
indirectly.
(From the Madison Square Speech.)
The investigations which have' been in pro
.gress during the past year have disclosed the
business methods of those who a few years ago
resented any inspection of their schemes and hid
their rascality under high-sounding phrases.
These investigations have also disclosed the
source of enormous campaign funds which have
been used to debauch elections ' and corrupt the
ballot. The people see now what they should
have seen before, namely, that no party can ex
terminate the trusts so long ad it owes its po
litical success to campaign contributions secured
from the trusts. The great corporations do not
contribute their money to airy party except for
immunity expressly promised or clearly implied.
The president has recommended legislation on this
subject, but so far his party has failed to respond.
No important advance can be made until this
corrupting Influence is eliminated and I hope that
the democratic party will not only challenge the
republican party to bring forward effective legis
lation on this subject, but will set an example by
retuslng to receive campaign contributions from
corporations and by opening the books so that
every contributor of any considerable sum may be
known to the public before the election. The great
majority of corporations are engaged in legiti
tnate business and have nothing to fear from hos
tile legislation and they "should not be permit
ted to use the money of the stockholders to ad
vance the political opinions of the officers of the
corporations. Contributions should be individual,
not corporate, and no party can afford to receive
contributions even from Individuals when the ac
ceptance of those contributions secretly pledge
th party to a course which it can not openly avow.
JXa?eP !?r.dB P0lIUcs 8houJd bG honest, and I
mistake political conditions in America if they do
paIg5seSage improvemont In the conduct of cam-
COLLECTING DEBTS BY NAVY
(From Mr. Roosevelt's Message.)
inn1? my essae to you on the 5th of December,
w' Cailetyour attentIon to the embarrassment
that might be caused to .this government by the
assertion by foreign nations of the right to col
lect by force of arms contract debts due by Amer-
Sne??,ll?B to citIzens of the collecting nation,
and to the danger that the process of compulsory
collection might result In the occupation of terri
tory tending to become permanent. I then said:
Our own government has always refused to en
force such contractual obligations on behalf of
V
PW5B
- W-r!
Jl.'flJelilfcii1 --mt.-iiagjyj
?. V
