strength and compactness in the situation which now confronts it; but, unless history fails to repeat itself, the coming year will find it presenting itself with perfect alignment against the common enemy. The very men who in the extra session of Congress were upbraiding their fellow-Republicans will be joyfully marching in the next campaign arm in arm with the objects of their condemnation; and while still insisting that the full measure of downward revision has not been reached, will advocate support of the party, which was held to a meagre redemption of a solemn pledge only through the vigorous and unyielding determination of President Taft.

Corporations and Federal Inquisition

He

The nation is confronted with a new proposition in the corporation tax which is embodied in the tariff law. This tax was imposed upon the country because Senator Aldrich, the chairman of the finance committee, was unable to assure the President and Congress that the revenue law would be ample to meet the current expenses of the Government. made an estimate, but, in the face of a constantly increasing deficit, it was necessary to present something more assuring than an indefinite guess. Mr. Aldrich should be given credit for believing that the corporation tax is not needed as a revenue producer, and he predicts that it will be repealed in two years. Whether this be true or not, the fact remains that there is now upon the statute books a law which imposes a tax of one per cent. upon the earnings of corporations.

The tax itself, however, is only the shell and not the kernel of the statute. President Taft himself has given notice of the real significance of the legislation. He says:

The corporation tax is a just and equitable excise measure, which it is hoped will produce a sufficient amount to prevent a deficit, and which incidentally will secure valuable statistics and information concerning the many corporations of the country, and will constitute an important step toward that degree of publicity and regulation which the tendency in corporate enterprises in the last twenty years has shown to be necessary.

Herein the purpose of the tax is clearly revealed. The country is informed that it "will secure valuable statistics and information concerning the many corporations," and that eventually there will be a larger degree of publicity and regulation. In other words, what cannot be accomplished directly is to be attained by indirect methods. We are to know how great are the profits of the oil trust and the beef trust and the sugar trust and the lead trust, and all the other corporations which have. grown great within recent years. Not only these giant concerns but every minor corporation is to be placed under federal surveillance. The imag

ination is almost staggered in the contemplation of where this new policy will lead. The corporation tax bureau can easily become the most important attachment of our Government. It will require an army of clerks and inspectors to secure and classify and record all the details of the corporate business of the country, and in its archives will be deposited the most important commercial secrets. When this information has been secured, we are informed, there will be the basis for needed regulation. What form will this regulation assume? Will the nation deliberately restrict the immense profits which these corporations enjoy? How far will the President go in his insistence upon the exercise of federal authority in the control of private corporations?

And, most important of all, what will the corporations do? Is it to be supposed that they will acquiesce without a struggle in this effort to wrest from them the secrets of their business which they have so carefully guarded? The answer is, unquestionably and emphatically, in the negative. It is not to be supposed for a moment that they will fail to take advantage of every legal obstacle. The probability is that the constitutionality of the law will be at once questioned, and that, finally, any effort to collect the tax will be held in abeyance until a decision is rendered by the court of last resort.

The Outlook for the Income Tax

An

When, a few months ago the income tax was discussed at some length in THE FORUM, the statement was made that the imposition of the tax might, within a short time, become a vital question. This prediction has now been verified. amendment to the Constitution, providing for an income tax, has passed both branches of Congress, and has been submitted to the several States for ratification. The question will be a live political issue next fall, because several States will then elect the legislatures which will pass upon the proposed amendment. The affirmative votes of thirty-four States are necessary to ratify the income-tax proposition, and it becomes interesting, therefore, to glance over the political field and present some facts upon which those who are interested in the outcome may base their conclusions. First of all, New York will elect a legislature next fall which will meet on January 9, 1910, and which will, in all probability, decline to ratify. In the same category may be placed Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Maryland also elects a legislature this fall, the result of its action being in doubt. Virginia's legislature, soon to be chosen, may ratify. New Jersey's legislature meets annually, and the vote will be taken early next spring. Kentucky, Louisiana, South Carolina and Mississippi have already elected

the legislatures which will vote upon the question, and their decision will be recorded within the next few months. In all the other States, except Georgia, no election for a legislature will occur before November, 1910, so that the spring of 1911 will arrive before the fate of the income-tax amendment is definitely known.

The action already taken by the Georgia legislature is a surprise. It was naturally supposed that the South would stand solidly for the income tax. Nearly all of the Southern States have declared for the tax in their State platforms, and their delegations in national Democratic conventions have uniformly and with practical unanimity indorsed the proposition. Brought face to face, however, with the direct question, the Georgia legislature declined to ratify. This result is a severe blow to those who believe that an income tax is a logical and legitimate source of revenue, and it makes it certain that the adoption of the amendment is not to be easily secured. Advices from Georgia are to the effect that as soon as it became evident that the legislature proposed to act upon the amendment a powerful opposition lobby made itself evident. There were some members of the legislature who were honestly opposed to the tax, but, upon the whole, the antagonism was stimulated by those upon whom the burden of the tax would fall most heavily. It was also noticeable that hostility was manifested by protected interests, evidently upon the ground that the acquisition of a large revenue from an income tax would decrease the necessity for a tariff, and go far toward undermining the present protective system.

It is evident, therefore, that considerable and, doubtless effective force will be used in every State to prevent the ratification of the amendment, and past experience demonstrates that it is easier to secure negative than affirmative action when vigorous opposition is exerted. The movement will also be handicapped by the fact that, if a dozen or more States record themselves adversely to the tax before any favorable action is taken, the momentum thus occasioned will be difficult to overcome. It is not without significance that Governor Marshall, the Democratic executive of Indiana, has declined to call an extra session of the legislature of the State to consider the proposed amendment, although requested to do so by Mr. Bryan. Gov. Marshall's reason for non-action is that he cannot convene the legislature for a specific purpose, and that it would be unwise to invite disturbance of present conditions by giving the legislature opportunity to enter upon a protracted era of law-making. Be this as it may, it is but another evidence that the income tax is not to be imposed upon the country in hasty or ill-considered fashion. There will be ample discussion of its merits and demerits; and its ultimate adop

tion, if that shall be the consummation of the contest, may be accepted as the deliberate judgment of the American people. The fact that thirtyfour States must ratify renders the adoption of the amendment, however, exceedingly doubtful.

An important convention will be held in Washington next January for the purpose of securing uniformity in State legislation. This is, without question, one of the most important matters now before the American people. It is the only alternative which is offered as against the increase of the federal power.

Uniformity in State Legislation

Senator Root, whose great ability and sagacity none can question, took occasion some time ago, in an address delivered in New York, to emphasize the fact that federal authority was made necessary by the failure of the States to act; while President Roosevelt, who out-Hamiltons Hamilton in his advocacy of federal power, went even further and insisted that, in the very nature of things, it would be impossible for the States to achieve, by separate and distinct laws, the remedial measures which the complex civilization of the present day demands. Every one knows that the national quarantine law, the purefood law, the law for the suppression of lotteries, the immigration law, and all the other statutes of similar character, stretch the elasticity of the federal constitution to the furthest point; but they are sustained, either by the courts or by public sentiment, because they are absolutely essential to our national welfare. The advocates of federal legislation are not content with these achievements. They desire a national child-labor law, a national marriage and divorce law, and even federal regulation of the liquor traffic and of automobiles, all of which come purely within the jurisdiction of the State. The trouble is that, even when the States act upon matters which are of more or less national concern, their laws are not alike, and confusion naturally results. The imaginary line which separates two Sates is a division between totally dissimilar conditions.

The proposed convention will consider the more important subjects upon which concerted legislation is most desirable, and will endeavor to secure the enactment of these uniform laws. Its purpose is certainly most commendable, and it is to be hoped that it will attain its desired result. Henry Litchfield West.

EUROPEAN EXPANSION AND EAST AFRICA

BY NORMAN DWIGHT HARRIS

"THE true diplomatist," said Waldo Warren, "is the man who has advanced most in the gentle art of getting along with his fellow-men." European Powers who had been rivals for years and had waged frequent and bitter wars at home for the possession of small areas of land, found it possible to practice the gentle art of diplomacy with success in Africa. The partition of the Dark Continent, in spite of the keen rivalry and lively competition engendered by the contest, was not marred by a single bloody conflict between the white nations.

Africa with its 11,500,000 square miles of territory is large enough to include besides Europe, India, China and the United States-with room to spare. Here would seem to be space enough for the expansion and enterprise of all the European states; and this is without doubt one of the important reasons why violent encounters between them were fortunately avoided. But several other excellent motives were apparent before the movement was well under way.

Previous to 1880, the European governments were too busily occupied with local affairs and too weak financially and economically to think seriously of colonial empires. When the smoke of those two vital conflicts of the nineteenth century-the Franco-Prussian war and the RussoTurkish struggle of 1877-1878-had cleared away and the map of Europe had finally been adjusted with a fair degree of dissatisfaction, the statesmen were able to rise above the petty strife for military glory and local territorial aggrandisement and to take a saner, broader view of a nation's destiny. And a transformation was begun, which was to lift European diplomacy out of its Mediterranean leading-strings and place it upon a plane as wide as the world. Man's political horizon was elevated until European and American politics became a World politics which embraced every state and every land.

Fortunately during the years 1870-1890 the Western world was undergoing a remarkable financial and economic development that would make possible this world diplomacy of the future. In Germany an industrial revolution occurred, which dotted the land with factories and increased its trade to nearly $2,000,000,000 by 1890. France paid off her $2,000,000,000 war debt within two years and underwent an equally astonishing development until she was able to loan Germany $250,000,000 for industrial improvements and become the banker of Europe. The extensive British trade increased from £547,000,000 in