10
THE NEBRASKA INDEPENDENT.
MAY 14, 1903,
X
4 J
-SI
1
fi
1
it
'A
It
1 J
...
Compensation for Landlords
(Written for Henry George Edition
of The Independent)
In the Cooper Union debate, be
tween Ioui3 F. Tost of Chicago and
Prof. John B. Clark of Columbia col
lege, the latter laid stress upon the
fact, in adopting the single tax, many
people "who hare invested their money
in lands "would suffer loss and there
fore the single tax would be unjust
This objection to the movement has
often been '.urged and to the average,
citixen is probably the most power
ful of all the arguments against the
single tax. It is admitted by single
taxers that tht adoption of this sys
tem would destroy the selling value
- cf : -! ggij" fron (improvements
thereon, and to the popular mind, it
eeems unfair to legislate the value
out of aay man's holding. Many peo
ple who believe the single tax would
be a good thing if it had been adopted
in the first settlement of the country,
cannot see how it could now be put
In force without working hardship to
a large per .cent of the people unless
the land owner be compensated for his
loss. '.,
But those who study the single .tax
without prejudice and who are will
ing to follow truth wherever It may
lead them, will find this objection
more apparent than real. - Professor
Clark illustrates by citing the man
who owns a lot worth fire thousand i
dollars on which he has built a house
worth five thousand dollars. To ex- i
empt the house and lay all taxes upon
the lot would destroy the five thou
sand dollars value of the lot, and
whereas the man Is now worth "ten
thousand dollars, ' under the single
tar he would be worth only five thou- ;
sand dollars. To many people this i
look like confiscation, but Is there j
any realloss to the owner? If the
value of the house and the lot are
now equal, it will make .his taxes no
higher by laying them all on the lot
The house will be just as useful for a
dwelling as before. -He could sell the
property, it is true, ,for only half
what what it would bring now, but
that could make no difference since
all Other lands and lots, under the
single tax, would have no selling val
ue and should he want to build an
other house In some other locality or
erect a business block or a factory
of some kind, he would not have to
pay out a large sum for a site. The
same principle holds good when ap
plied to improved land in any form
where the land Is being pat to Its
highest use. While the property own
er as cited in this illustration would
nominally own less wealth under the
single tax than under existing condi
tions, he would in reality own just
as much real wealth, and if the sin
gle tax would benefit the community,
as all single taxers claim, then he
would share in the benefits. It is
often pointed out that while the sin
gle tax might be all right in cities
and towns, it would be unjust to the
farmer since it is claimed that the
value of farming lands is greater than
that of the improvements and per
sonal property of the farmer. This
may be true in many farming dis
tricts, or for that matter in all, but
here again the difficulty is only ap
parent As to local taxes for school
and township purposes In a farming
community the farmers must pay them
any way and they certainly can lose
nothing by exempting their improve
ments and stock. But where is the
farming district that does not con
tain many farms and tracts of-unimproved
land owned by non-residents?
To exempt the resident farmer's im
provements, stock and machinery, and
increasing the tax' on the land held by
the non-resident could certainly be
no loss to the farmer. But if the
land values In farming districts are
. greater than the value of improve
ments and personal property It is so
only because under the present un
just system the average farmer has
not been able to equip and improve
his farm as it should be. With tim
ber, coal, and iron lands monopolized
and tariff-protected trusts controlling
all products used by the farmer in
improving and operating his farm,
and , the highways by which he must
reach the markets of the world con
trolled by private corporations, it Is
little vronder that his stock machin
ery ., and Improvements are of less
value than the land. The single 'tax
carried i to its full extent would de
stroy ! the power of the trust to rob
the people and make the j railroads
public highways.' r" ! i ;
What should it matter to the work
ing farmer if under the single tax his
unimproved land values were swept
away, If It, at the came time, ren
dered the trust and railroad monopoly
powerless to rob him of half his year
ly earnings and opened up boundless
rmnArtnnltlftfi In tha future for his
Children? The farmer's real wealth-!
. cannot be measured by the number of
dollars his farm would sell for, but
by the number and extent of the op
portunities he may make use of to
give his family a comfortable home,
to educate bis children and to give
them a start in life. " What better
could the farmer do for. the future of
his children than to make the land
forever free?
But why should the single tax be
singled out from all other proposed
industrial reforms and be condemned
on this ground? Is there riow or has
there ever been a social or economic
measure advocated or adopted that is
not open to the same objection? Many
people honestly believe a protective
tariff is a benefit to the farmer and
wage laborer, yet - its adoption de
fvjrai imwiawM values based on-th?
shipping industry and foreign trade.
Many people also think that free trade
or at least a large reduction of exist
ing tariffs would better the condition
of the masses, yet this would evi
dently result in heavy loss to a large
class, of t Investors. Several states
have adopted laws against the manu
facture and sale of intoxicating liq
uors which entailed great loss upon
the liquor dealers and manufacturers.
The repeal of the national banking
act would cause a slump in the price
of government bonds, and the remone
tlzation of silver would reduce the
value of credits. Even the destruction
or regulation of trusts and combines
would cause a tumble In industrial
stocks, and the widows and orphans
whose savings are invested in these
securities would be impoverished.
Have the advocates of any of these
movements ever considered the ques
tion of loss or compensation to the
classes affected. It is true that the
government reimbursed Queen Liliuo
kalani for the loss of her throne, and
the sultan of Sulu and his datos have
been given a monthly allowance for
permitting their subjects to revel in
the benefits of a higher civilization,
but there never has been or never can
be a social movement for the better
ment of mankind without some indi
vidual loss w temporary hardship. Of
an the proposed reforms the single
tax would be attended with the least
inconvenience and result in the great
est benefits.
Allusion has been made to the anti
slavery movement In its early days,
when the opponents of slavery always
advocated compensation to the slave
holders. It may be that at that time
the advocates of freedom thought it
the right thing to pay the slave-holder
for his lawful property or they may
have made this concession in order to
escape persecution, butr it is a notor
ious fact that when the anti-slavery
movement gained sufficient power to
accomplish results the public con
science was not so considerate of the
slave-owners' Tights. Apologists may
say that the abolition of slavery was
effected as a military necessary and
perhaps this is to some extent true,
but the emancipation proclamation
did not aid the federal cause so much
by weakening the south as it did by
strengthening the north. There was
a widespread fear among the old anti
slavery leaders that the war might
end without the slaves being freed
and some definite action on the part
of the government had to be taken
in order to hold the abolitionists in
line with the government It was not,
however, a military necessity that led
congress to adopt the thirteenth and
fourteenth amendments which set
free the slaves, not only of the states
which had seceded, but of the loyal
states as well; not only the slaves of
men who had given their aid and sup
port to the rebellion, but of those also
who had, held true to the stars and
stripes and at the same time inserted
a clause forbidding congress ever to
allow a claim for the loss of slaves.
The single tax, like all other pro
posed measures for the good of man,
should be tried on its merits and if
it would result in benefit to the masses
after once it became established any
temporary hardship that might result
on its adoption should not be consid
ered. J. H. SHEETS.
Browervflle, Minn. -
What's hi a name? Is there any
significance In the fact that A. FREE
LAND and Louis FREELAND Post
are foremost among single taxers, or
is It a mere coincidence that they are
battling for Free Land, Free Trade,
and Free Men? De France.
- If you are interested in economical
buying examine the bargains offered
by Fred Schmidt & Bro. in the full
page advertisement in this issue. The
firm has been continuously in busi
ness for more than 30 years. Send
them an order by man and The Inde
pendent will guarantee that you will
not regret it Try it today.
Special subscription rate to singla
taxers, 5 months 25c
Lasd Values Witbocf Lsbor
(Written for Jlenry George Edition
of The Independent) ':..
. In the year 1626 the West India
company acquired from the .Indians,
through - Peter Minuit the right of
possession of Manhattan Island,
which contained ' about twenty-four
thousand acres of land, for the sum
of twenty-four dollars, about one
tenth of . a cent per acre. . The com
pany did not sell the land thus ac
quired, but permitted any one to se
lect such as he wanted to use. The
original members of this community
were mostly traders, requiring for
residence or store but small lots of
land, which they selected without re
gard tO Suifonslty ; Other iu&ii -that
suggested by the formation of the land
itself. It was not till 1656 that there
Fere any streets or other public im
provements; yet as early as 1643 a
lot thirty by one hundred and ten
feet on what now is Bridge street was
sold by Adam Jacobson Van Steen
wyck to Anthony Jansen Van Fees
for twenty-four guilders, equal to nine
dollars and a half.
In 1656 a survey of the city of New
Amsterdam was made, and the city
laid down on a map which was con
firmed by law "to remain from this
time forward without alteration." Af
ter this time ...grants of . land were
made only to actual settlers on con
dition that they should be improved
at once; and several persons who were
disposed to keep the lots which had
been previously granted them in their
original condition for speculative pur
poses, were ordered either to build on
them or sell, and if they refused to do
so, their lots were taxed.
Larger tracts of land in the out
skirts of the town and beyond wer
granted to settlers for farming pur
poses, while other tracts were re
tained by the company for ltsown
use as farms, one of which, bounded
by what is now Fulton and Chambers
streets, and Broadway and the North
river, has since become the property
of Trinity church corporation.
At a very early date a piece of land
was set aside as a burial ground for
the English, situated north of Bowl
ing Green and west of Broadway,
which in 1656 had become so full of
dead men's bones as to make it de
sirable to close it up and select a site
for a new one; but it was not till ten
years later that this was done, when
the old graveyard was divided into
four lots, oach twenty-five by one
hundred feet, and , sold at auction,
fetching a , price, although no labor
had been exerted upon them. The
new site chosen for the English
church was nearly opposite the head
of Wall street, running from Broad
way to Hudson river, a part of which
was set aside for a graveyard. It is
on this land that the present Trin
ity church and graveyard are located,
which together with other large tracts
of land that have from time to time
come into possession of the English
church, or practically the same or
ganized body, that now forms the
basis of the great wealth and power
of the Trinity church corporation. The
land between the old and new grave
yards was at that time occupied by
the gardens and dwellings of Mr.
Vandegrist and Mr. Van Dyck, which
as well as the old graveyard sitehave
since undoubtedly changed hands
many times. But all the land de
scribed, whether it has changed hands
or not whether it has had labor ex
tended on It or has remained a
graveyard, has acquired an enormous
value. The first Trinity church was
built in 1696 and destroyed by fire
during the revolutionary war, but the
value of the land was not destroyed
with It Could this undestroyed value
owe its existence to the destruction
of the labor value of the church? If
the present Trinity church, and all
the receptacles of the dead attached
to it, and the accumulated remains of
the dead that have , been buried in
them during the past two hundred
years were to be removed from the
land, the value of the land would not
move with them, but would be en
hanced; and If this land were to be
sold at auction today, it would realize
many millions of dollars; and it will
hardly be claimed that these millions
represent the result of the labor that
has been expended upon it
There are at the present time parts
of the island from which all evidence
of individual labor has disappeared,
and upon which little, if any, com
munal labor has been exerted, that
when sold command enormous prices.
One illustration will suffice. In 1S84
Vice President Morton bought a piece
of land in the upper part of Manhat
tan, - containing four bundred city
lots, for which, he paid 1400,000. In
1890 he sold these lots for 11.000,000
and during the time they were in his
possession no labor, either Individual
or communal, was exerted upon them.
TTia nnlv la Vinr Mr Mnrtnn nprfnrmert
in connection with -them has been
the payment of the taxes, which can
not have exceeded $30,000.:;, It will
hardly be claimed that the "payment
of such taxes has caused the land to
more ' than double in value in six
years. Three weeks or so later the
syndicate that had bought these lots
from Mr. Morton again sold them for.
$1,500,000 at no cost to, it over and
above what it had paid to Mr. Morton
exeept the expenses of the sale.
' What has brought . this Immense
value into existence? - It has been'
shown that shortly after the West
India company located on the south
ern extremity of Manhattan island,
and , before any public improvements
had been made, a certain lot of land
ITT 1 I 1 "1 , .
ii uori wn rn iici lauur nan ueen ei
erted, had acquired a value and was
sold for a price. In common parlance
we say the land was sold, but this Is
only apparently true, for man can
not produce land, therefore he cannot
rightfully sell It, and as no labor had
been exerted on this land it ; could
not have been the. result of labor that
was sold. What was sold? The priv
ilege of using , the land. What gave
value to this privilege? The presence
of population and the existence of
communal life, wnat caused tne ex
istence of the community? Manhat
tan Island being favorably located for
trade and commerce, It was a natural
opportunity which men could use to
great advantage. Did man create
Manhattan Island ? No. How thca
could he rightfully sell it? Men pro
duce wealth which is their property, ,
communities create land values which
is their property; respect on the part
of each for the other's rights will se-
cure the rights of both in the land. ;
l tmnK u wm De conceaea mat tne
value of the lot which was sold in
1642 was the value of the privilege of
using it; the value of the good will
given to it by the community, so to
speak; and if it was true of this lot,
it must have been of the. old grave
yard, and of the present graveyard
attached to Trinity church, and it ;
must also be true of all land that has
any value; for no matter how costly
the improvements may be that ara
attached to land, the value of such
improvements is always additional to
the value of the privilege of using it.
The selling price of bare land alone,
without improvements, represents the
capitalization of the untaxed value of
the privilege of using It, which were
it wholly taxed would totally destroy;
the' selling price of land.
The single tax is the means b$
which the rights of the land of both
the community and the individuals
who compose it can be equitably ad
justed, as it will discriminate between
what is rightfully the property of the
landholder and the property of the
community. The individual win then
retain as secure possession of the
land he uses as . he does at presents
nay, more so, because he will hold it
honestly, and also of his property,
because the community will then sup
port itself out of its ground rents and
not out of the property of its mem
bers, as it now does.
JOHN FILMER.
Brooklyn, N. Y.
it
i
It -r-
rnnr
Hat on
Straight.
Pat. May s 93
Do you hold your hat frith one hand when the
wind TblewsJ os it wabble from aid to side",
disarranging yonr hair, giving yon an untidy
appearance and making you feel uncomfort
able 7 Do you value year personal appearance
and comfort T If io, you should use the Safety
Hat Pins. They attach lo the hat, are always
where yon want them, curve to fit the head,
pass under all the hair, don't scratch the head
or ruin the hat. 26c by mail. Money refunded
if not satisfactory. Lady agents wasted to in
troduce them. EDGERTON MFG. CO.,
Lincoln, Neb.
TIFFANY'S Sore Death to
Lice (Powder) sprinkled
la the nest keeps year
fowl free frem lice. Sprinkle
hen and the little chicks will
hare no lice . Tlffe tir'i'Paratroa
"Liquid" kills mites instantly.
Sprinkle bed tor hogs, roosts
for fowls. Box powder for lit
tle turkeys and chicks post
paid 10c "We want agents.
THE TIFFANY CO
t , ; XJjacoln, limb,
mHaMHBMMaMaMMae
You cannot do better than : to take
advantage of the exceptional offes
made by Branch & Miller Co. in this
issue. They will send you more gro
ceries for $10 than any store In Amer
ica. , See their ad. on another page.
The goods are first class in qualitx
and full weight Jnl every ase.iTbi
offer is Indorsed and recommended bx
The Independent. :; ,; f4 : . ,
literature explaining the single tax
idea mailed free on request Address
F. H. Monroe, president Henry George
association, 356 Dearborn st Chicago.