SECTION F.— ECONOMIC SCIENCE AND STATISTICS. 



INHERITANCE AS AN ECONOMIC 



FACTOR. 



ADDRESS BY 



SIR JOSIAH STAMP, G.B.E., F.B.A., 



PRESIDENT OF THE SECTION. 



I. Introduction. 



It will probably not be disputed that one of the fundamental institutions 

 of our modern life which is likely to come under criticism and challenge 

 in the next twenty or thirty years is that of Inheritance. In the first 

 place, it is considered to be inextricably bound up with the inequality of 

 incomes and wealth ; this inequality is said to be an ofience against social 

 justice ; and this offence, in turn, is said to be a source of social unrest 

 which is against the interests of the whole community. In the second 

 place, it is said to be essential to the accumulation of capital resources 

 which, irrespective of their ownership, are said to be vital to progress, 

 and, indeed, to the maintenance of industrial civilisation. In the third 

 place, the satisfaction of fiscal needs, with the problems of the most suitable 

 forms of taxation, raises important questions as to the economic reactions 

 of inheritance. And lastly, the theory of socialism, continually urged as 

 a better and more advanced system for economic life, is demanding 

 profound changes in this principle. 



It is the purpose of my address to ask whether economic science, 

 standing clear of the political arena and so-called class interests, with 

 their mere defence of what is, or their mere attack upon it, has had any 

 definite findings to contribute to the discussion of the whole case ; and, if 

 not, to suggest some of the chief questions which have to be explored 

 and answered by economists before such findings can properly be arrived 

 at, and to set out some possible or provisional answers which are at 

 present available. 



I am aware that a complete discussion of the matter extends beyond 

 economics into ethical, and even philosophical fields. For example, 

 suppose that a case of social injustice stands clearly proven upon all those 

 facts of a case which are apparent to and comprehensible by the average 

 individual who is moved by such a feeling. But suppose, also, that if 

 an extension of mental power or experience were possible, a second series 

 of underlying tendencies could be brought into comprehension which would 

 modify that case, and correct an illusion. What is the proper mode of 

 action ? If society has a right to determine its own form and destiny, 

 must it be dealt with as it thinks it is, or as it ought to think it is ? It 

 may well be that the full economic case will ultimately present the most 

 difficult dilemma of all — a dilemma of two planes, transcendental, or, at 



