ning counter to the pronounced anti-liquor sentiment of the rural communities. Under these circumstances nothing else than a series of compromises could have been expected. Concessions were made to the liquor interests on the one hand, and to the radical temperance element on the other. The new law provides, in the first place, that all persons engaging in the liquor business shall pay a tax of $600 a year, and that this tax shall be a lien on all property, real and personal, used in the business. A distinction is drawn, however, between this tax and a license for the sale of liquors. Whatever may be the ethical philosopher's view of the State's obligation to sanction a business from which it derives revenue, the Iowa law explicitly declares that it does not, in terms, legalize the retailing of liquors, and that the payment of the required tax by a liquor-seller shall not constitute a protection from penalties already enacted for engaging in liquor-selling, except that under certain conditions the penalties may be suspended. These conditions, in brief, are as follows: In cities of five thousand or more inhabitants, a majority of the voters may sign a statement of consent which will cause the payment of the tax, in quarterly instalments, to act as a bar to prosecution under the prohibitory statute, provided the business shall not be conducted without the consent of adjacent property owners, nor within 300 feet of a church or school building, that bonds shall be given for the payment of resulting damages and for observance of the law, that the selling shall be carried on in a single room having but one entrance or exit, and that opening on a public business street, that the bar shall be in plain view from the street, that no gambling, music, or other form of amusement shall be permitted, that no women shall be employed in the business, that the place of sale shall be closed from 10 P.M. to 5 A.M. and on Sundays and holidays, and that no sales shall be allowed to minors or drunkards. In towns of less than five thousand inhabitants a statement of consent can have like effect only when signed by 65 per cent. of the voters. The prohibitory law thus remains in force in a large proportion of the country districts. The cities and towns have a kind of local option; while throughout the State the traffic in intoxicating liquors, whether legally or surreptitiously con

ducted, is subjected to a special form of tax. Such, at least, is the theory of the situation; but conditions have, in fact, changed very little since the new law took effect. The old prohibitory statute is still violated openly, and liquor-dealers do not trouble themselves to conform to the exactions of the so-called "mulct" act. In the "river" towns public sentiment does not demand compliance with either the old or the new law, and in the State at large nothing seems to have been gained or lost by the prohibitionists.

The new local option law of Kentucky applies to communities already under prohibition, as well as to all that have not heretofore voted on the question. Elections may be ordered by petitions of voters, not oftener than once in three years. Prohibition enacted by such a vote is not to apply to manufacturers, wholesale dealers, or druggists.

An important law was passed in Maryland relating to the medical treatment of habitual drunkards at suitable institutions at the expense of the State. The act provides that the kin of an habitual drunkard may petition the Circuit Court to send the drunkard to an institution for medical treatment, but that the patient must sign a written agreement to take the treatment and obey the rules of the institution. The friends of the drunkard must have the testimony of three tax-payers that they are believed to be incapable of paying for this treatment. Then, if the drunkard has been a resident of Maryland for six months, any judge of the Circuit Court may commit him to such a medical institution at the cost of the State. There is no requirement by which a drunkard need be committed a second time. "Habitual drunkard" is defined to be one who uses "spirituous, malt, or fermented liquors, cocaine, or other narcotics to such a degree as to deprive him or her of reasonable self-control."

Iowa prohibits the selling or giving of cigarettes or tobacco in any form to minors under sixteen years of age. Similar laws have been passed by many States, but are usually dead letters. Kentucky and Maryland make stringent provisions concerning the sale or exhibition of obscene literature, pictures, etc., especially to minors.

South Carolina and Iowa make prize-fighting a penal offence.

In Iowa, security may be required of participants in any performance which threatens to become a prize-fight that the offence will not be committed. Any authorized magistrate may demand this security, after an investigation, when he finds just reason to fear an attempt to bring about such an event.

The "race-track" laws of the preceding year in New Jersey were repealed, and stringent anti-gambling measures enacted, and in Rhode Island and Virginia pool-selling was prohibited. State inspection and regulation of quasi public corporations have been carried farther in Massachusetts than elsewhere. The issue of stock and bonds by such corporations without official approval of some sort is strictly forbidden. In the case of gas and electric light companies this approval must come from the State Board of Gas and Electric Light Commissioners; action by water companies must have the sanction of the Commissioner of Corporations; the approval of the Railroad Commissioners is necessary to all stock or bond issues on the part of railroad and street railway companies.

Louisiana has created a railroad commission, with power in the adjustment of rates.

The new grade-crossing law of Iowa concerns crossings of one railroad over another, or over swing or draw bridges. It provides for safety appliances at such crossings. The apportionment of cost of construction and maintenance of such devices between two corporations is left to the district courts. State authority is not invoked.

In New York villages already owning water-works are empowered to own gas and electric light plants also, whenever a majority of the voters so decide.

By a new law in Iowa, women are granted the suffrage on questions of municipal or school bonds or increase of the tax levy.

In Iowa provision is made for increasing the security of depositors in State banks. If the capital stock of such banks becomes impaired, it must be raised by assessment on the stockholders; and, in case of failure to pay such assessments, the shares are to be sold at public auction. Should the directors neglect to comply with these provisions of the law, they become individually liable for the impairment of the

stock. The total liabilities of a State bank are limited to 20 per cent. of the paid-in stock. False entries or statements in the books of a bank constitute an offence punishable by a fine of $5,000, or imprisonment of from two to five years. The condition of each State bank must be examined by a committee of the directors quarterly.

State banks of circulation have been provided for in Georgia and Virginia.

Maryland corporations hereafter formed will be compelled to pay a bonus to the State of 1 per cent. on their capital, with a like percentage on any future increase of capital.

Ohio puts a special tax on the business of selling cigarettes; and sleeping-car companies doing business in the State are taxed 1 per cent. on capital and property owned or used in Ohio, after deducting real estate assessed in the State.

Kentucky taxes the stock of building associations by requiring the shares to be listed by the owners and taxed as other personal property of individuals; but borrowing members are exempted from this tax if the amounts borrowed equal or exceed the amounts paid in on shares. Surplus funds and undivided profits are to be listed by the association.

The growing popularity of the inheritance tax is evidenced anew in the Ohio legislation of the year. In that State a tax of 5 per cent. is laid on all property, "tangible or intangible," passing on the death of the grantor to any person other than father, mother, husband, wife, brother, sister, niece, nephew, lineal descendant, or adopted child of the grantor. This Ohio law differs from those of other States in that real estate is made to contribute as well as personal property. Of this tax the State will receive three-fourths, and the county one-fourth, in each case. Besides this "collateral" inheritance tax the Ohio legislature provided for the levying of a progressive tax on all inheritances known as "direct"; i.e., passing to the relatives of the degrees exempted from the operation of the The rate of this "direct" inheritance tax is

5 per cent. tax. fixed as follows:

When the value of the entire property of such decedent exceeds the sum of $20,000 and does not exceed the sum of $50,000, 1 per cent.; when it exceeds $50,000 and does not exceed $100,000, 11⁄2 per cent.; when it

exceeds $100,000 and does not exceed $200,000, 2 per cent.; when it exceeds $200,000 and does not exceed $300,000, 3 per cent.; when it exceeds $300,000 and does not exceed $500,000, 31⁄2 per cent.; when it exceeds $500,000 and does not exceed $1,000,000, 4 per cent.; and when it exceeds $1,000,000, 5 per cent.

The division of the proceeds between the State and the county is in the same ratio of three to one as in the case of collateral inheritances. New York was the only predecessor of Ohio among the States in the adoption of a direct inheritance tax, and there the rate is 1 per cent. on all sums in excess of $10,000. The distinctive feature of the Ohio system is the introduction of the progressive principle.

The collateral inheritance tax of New Jersey is similar to that of Ohio. Churches, hospitals, and orphan asylums, public libraries, Bible and tract societies, and all religious, benevolent, and charitable institutions and organizations are exempted.

In this connection a recent decision of the New York Court of Appeals is worth noting. The question arose whether the estate or the legacy was the basis of the direct inheritance tax. In the Hoffman case the Surrogate of New York County held that, if the estate was worth $10,000, it should pay a tax of 1 per cent., whether each individual legacy amounted to $10,000 or not. The lower courts did not sustain this contention, holding that the tax could be on individual legacies only. The State Comptroller took an appeal, and the court of last resort confirms his position and that of the Surrogate, deciding that the whole estate is the basis of taxation.

WILLIAM B. SHAW.