This 
iesire 
1g, a 
quire 
fulfil- 
one’s 
very 
this 
‘0 be 
rity ; 
dis- 
‘tions 
forts 
could 
eople 
more 
other 
nd a 
rt of 
isfied 
y the 
limit 
cted) 
thing 
is of 
mtry 
The 
f the 
y, or 
pro- 
term 
1. Or 
Property and Inheritance. 
> 3 
such longer term as may be thought equitable. A 
more ingenious method is that proposed by the 
Italian philosopher, Eugenio Rignano. 
Restriction of Bequest. 
Rignano traces all the economic evils of modern 
society to the separation of labour from the instru- 
ment of production. His object is to restore these 
instruments to the possession of labour. Directly, 
this restoration is impossible, owing to the complexity 
of the modern productive system; but indirectly, 
through the agency of the State and various co- 
operative and syndicalist organisations, it may be 
achieved. He differs, however, from most Socialists 
in recognising the stimulus to work and save that 
private property now affords, and the necessity of 
preserving this stimulus if the accumulation of capital 
is to proceed. 
He proposes, therefore, to leave the right of 
succession, but to restrict it to the bare limits neces- 
sary if it is to operate as an incentive to wealth pro- 
duction and capital accumulation. The restriction 
is to be imposed in the form of an inheritance tax, 
“ progressive in time.” In other words, instead of 
making the tax progressive, like the English Estate 
Duties, a higher rate of tax being levied on the larger 
estates, he would graduate the tax according to the 
distance the estate had passed from the person whose 
activity or saving first accumulated it. Thus, the 
tax might be 20 per cent. at the first transmission, 
40 per cent. at the second, 60 per cent. at the third, 
80 per cent. at the fourth, and roo per cent. at the 
fifth ; this would mean that on an average all accumu- 
lations of wealth would pass to the State by the end 
of the third generation after that of the person who 
made them.