FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   382   383   384   385   386   387   388   389   390   391   392   393   394   395   396   397   398   399   400   401   402   403   404   405   406  
407   408   >>  
the community insofar as it helps to secure efficient management of wealth. If the son or relative has been in business with the deceased, there is a reason that he should inherit the property, and his succession to it makes the least disturbance to existing business conditions. This consideration, however, has less weight as the corporate form of organization becomes well nigh universal in "big business." Every profligate son, every incompetent heir, is an argument against the inheritance of property. It is to society's interest that no able-bodied member should stand idle. Every child should have presented to him the motive to use his powers in useful ways. Moreover, many feel that the great fortunes now accumulating through successive generations in the hands of a few families are a danger to our free society, even if these fortunes should continue to be well administered. There is a widespread feeling that the heredity of great wealth is, like the heredity of political power, out of harmony with the democratic spirit. Democracy wishes to see men and individuals put to the test, not profiting forever by the deeds of their forebears. This feeling is shared by those who cannot be charged with radical prejudices. It was startling when a conservative body of lawyers meeting in their state association in Illinois, passed a resolution favoring moderate limits to inherited fortunes. Almost every year sees bills of this purport introduced in the legislatures and in Congress. Probably no one of many current radical proposals is more widely favored than this, among men of otherwise conservative social views. Tho sum most often mentioned as the proper limit is $1,000,000, but in every case it is a sum larger than the fortune of the person speaking.[4] Sec. 6. #Limitations upon intestate inheritance#. A proposal less crude and with strong reasons of social expediency in its favor is to limit the right of intestate inheritance to persons that have been in essential economic and social relations with the deceased. The foregoing considerations show that the case for the right of gift in the lifetime of the giver is strongest; that for the right of bequest comes next. The man who has acquired wealth may usually be trusted to decide who bear to him close social or personal relations, and to say whose lives have in a measure furnished the motives of his activity. But the right of intestate inheritance by distant relatives is one th
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   382   383   384   385   386   387   388   389   390   391   392   393   394   395   396   397   398   399   400   401   402   403   404   405   406  
407   408   >>  



Top keywords:
social
 

inheritance

 
fortunes
 

business

 

intestate

 

wealth

 
feeling
 

society

 
heredity
 
relations

conservative

 

radical

 

property

 

deceased

 

mentioned

 
proper
 

resolution

 

favoring

 

moderate

 

Limitations


speaking

 

person

 
management
 

larger

 
fortune
 

relative

 
legislatures
 

Congress

 

Probably

 
Almost

introduced
 

purport

 

inherited

 

current

 

favored

 

widely

 

proposals

 

limits

 

trusted

 

decide


acquired

 

personal

 

distant

 
relatives
 
activity
 

motives

 

measure

 

furnished

 

bequest

 
strongest