INEQUALITIES OF WEALTH.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19902, 23 September 1926, Page 10

INEQUALITIES OF WEALTH.

METHODS OF INHERITANCE. SIR JO SI AH STAMP'S VIEW. (From Och Own Correspondent.) LONDON, August 11. “Inhsritance as an economic factor,” was the subject dealt with by Sir Joaiah Stamp in hie presidential address to the economic section of the British Association. "There could bo no better eugenic or sociological institution,” he declared, "than a kind of moving annuity, which would pass from generation to generation, not at the death of each person, but from him to his children at a point where his personal need for it has become less, and when his son’s needs have become greatest. The inherit ance would not, therefore, be one passing at death, but would be one passing at middle life. It would bo like a permanent endowment of the family at its most difficult periods, and there could be no more honourable object of ambition than to endow one’s family in this way, because it would be of the highest eugenic value to the community.” Inequalities of wealth appeared statistically less in France, probably in Gsrmany, and certainly in Italy. In all these the average standard of life was lower than in countries where inequality was greatest.

“Thcre must be many thousands, even millions,” declared Sir Josiah, “who continue to accept inequality, not so much of wealth, as of wealth due to inheritance as part if the scheme of things against which they have little grievance. They ars believers in Tuck,' and coming into wealth from a forgotten uncle in Australia may move to envy, but it does not load into malice or resentment. These vast numbers are sufficiently untouched in their economic activity by a sense of social injustice in every-day life to work Jess faithfully or less hard. Thera arc, however, numbers who in times of distress or unemployment and labour trouble can be brought to considerable moral reaction against any display of luxury on the part of tho ‘classes’ that do not work for a living. WHAT EXCITES ANIMOSITY.

“It is the inequality of reward and the multiplying power of accumulated wealth which excites animosity, not so much that particular part of it which may be duo to the inheritance system." In America he was assured that grievance about inheritance had no adverse effect on production on the part of workmen. “Indeed, I was assured that inequality of wealth to which this is contributory stirs men to effort at emulation, to ambition, and gives a dream and a goal. At the same time, so far as this country is concerned, if there were no inherited wealth at all it might be easier for the average mind to accept as inevitably associated with difference in human capacity, and even with the luck of the game, inequalities of fortune arising entirely in their own lifetime.

“My own view, after long consideration of tho available data, is that the power to bequeath savings that will remain intact is a most important factor in wealth accumulation and saving, and the desire to leave these savings for the direct-line children and grandchildren is an important special case of that incentive.” Inheritance Sir Josiah thought, had only a very slight effect in making men idle, however glaring individual cases might be. “But the effect upon subsequent saving and accumulation is moat important. A man with an inherited fortune of £20,000, who works hard and makes, say, £ISOO a year, has no strong incentive to do any more saving out of his combined income of £2500, and may be content to pass on the £30,000 intact. But for this fortune he might have been a new saver. 1 doubt if the deterrents ti saving which high death duties create are so important in their final effects, when one considers the increased incentive to new savings (and perhaps effort) which the lesser fortune to the recipient brings.”