14
THE NEBRASKA INDEPENDENT -
MAY 14, 1903.
THE tax vrnicn TIME imposes
(Written for Henry George Edition
of The Independent)
It is a subject of frequent remark
that the lifetime of the best of new
buildings today cannot be figured to
exceed two score yearsthat with
swiftly accelerating changes, In forty
years these will have to give way to a
new and better order. Granting thesa
facts, if during the forty years the
new buildings shall yield to the land
lord interest upon their cost and two
and a half per cent annually for de
preciation, he is at no disadvantage
from the necessity, at the end of forty
years, of tearing down and building
greater, while both labor, which builds
buildings, and business, which uses
buildings, will be greatly benefited by
such a process. Think what a para
dise any great city would be if built
over new every forty years; yet the
users of the buildings can well afford
to pay two and a half per cent a yea"
for such a luxury.
Any sensible readjustment and
equalization of taxation, should, it Is
thought, take directly Into the ac
count this annual depreciation as a
tax imposed by time upon all products
of labor, a tax so heavy as to seem an
instant excuse for exempting them
from all other taxes. "
On the other hand, while Time is
engaged In the destruction of the
building it la occupied in the construc
, tlon of the land value. The city of
Boston furnishes a striking illustra
tion of this fact, since the increase ia
the valuation of its land happens to
have been since 1888 almost exactly
five per cent a year on Its value of
fifteen years ago.
The inequality of the present sys
tem is made apparent in the follow
ing calculation (based upon the above
assumption of two and a half per cent
depreciation) regarding the land and
buildings of Boston for the last fif
teen years, bearing in mind that it is
not ; the rent, either of buildings or
land, that is under consideration, but
only the effect of taxes and deprecia
tion upon the one, and the opposi e
effects of taxes and appreciation upon
the other.
BUILDINGS.
The valuation of Boston's
buildings in 1888 was... .$234,000,000
Time's annual tax or depre
ciation (besides the city's
tax of Vz per cent which
is paid by the owner only
when he is also the ten
ant) 2yz per cent.. For
fifteen years it has been
37& per cent or........ 88,750,000
And the ' value of same
buildings in 1902 is..... $146,000,0, J
LAND.
The valuation of Boston's '.
land In 1888 was........ $328,000,000
Time's average net annual
appreciation has been
(after paying city's tax
of iy2 per cent) for one
year 5 per cent. For fif
teen years 75 per cent, or 245,000,000
And the value of the same
land In 1902 Is $573,000,000
Thus the increase in the . valuation
of land In fifteen years more than
equals the valuation of all the build
ings fifteen years ago.
Five per cent on this fifteen years'
increase of two hundred and forty -five
million would be more than
twelve million, which, added to the
four million assessed upon the land
in 1888 would be sixteen million, as
compared with the total of Boston's
taxes of eighteen million in 1902.
Those persons who agree with John
Stuart Mill that it would be sound
public policy and no injustice to land
owners, to take for public purposes
the future increase in ground rent,
will be interested to note what an
opportunity is shown by the above
figures to have been lost fifteen years
ago for putting such a plan In opera
tion In Boston. , , , v
C. B. FILLEBROWN,
President Massachusetts Single Tax
League. 68 Essex st, Boston. ,
POSSESSION BUT MOT OWNERSHIP
(Written for Henry George Edition
of The Independent) .
A tax ons land values Is a tax oh
rent, ground rent, while a tax on
anything produced by' labor is a tax
on wages. It ought not to take men
long to decide which is the better
tax that which is : Imposed ' on the
value of a privilege or that which Is
deducted from the earnings of labor.
For there would-be no rent if there
were not private property in land, and
there would be no private property in
land if the government did not give
to Individuals the privilege of exclud
ing the public from specific portions
of the miblic domain.
The single taxer finds no fault with
this exclusive possession of land. I
is necessary to the highest civiliza
tiort now possible. But It is; In each
case, a special privilege for which the
beneficiary should pay an annua!
rental to the public which is (or why
are) excluded. In that way only can
the inequalities of privilege and op
portunity be equalized.;. In that way
only can., be secured an equal chance
to alL And the history .of mankind
affords ample security that when each
shall have an equal chance with ev
ery other, there will be enough for all,
and that each shall enjoy according to
his deserts. v
The business of government is to
secure equal rights to all to see that
4he opportunities of nature are denied
to none. Under the single tax this
end could be attained, and in no oth
er way, because the single tax is Jus
tice, and whatever i? opposed to .the
single tax must be opposed to justice.
JOHN B. HOWARTH,
" Publisher "What's the Use."
East Aurora, N. Y.
The single tax does not change the
present methods of land tenure, but.
on the contrary, renders the owner of
a home, a farm, a business or factory
building, far more secure in his per
manent possession than he can pos
sibly be under the present system.
Neither does it confiscate one's im
provements fruits of his toil for
unpaid taxes, as does the present sys
tem, the land alone being liable. Nor
does it limit the amount of land one
can own and use, provided he can
and does uSe it so successfully as to
make it profitable. Only the drone,
the dog in th3 manger speculator, who
will neither use nor let others use,
will find It unprofitable to pay the
same tax as those using land. He
cannot hold up the next generation
for a large unearned Increment that
he did no more than others to , pro
duce. Paying the same tax for hold-
ng land idle as for its best use will
not be profitable. W. H. T. Wake
field. VSSN
BOTH RADICAL AND CONSERVATIVE
-(Written for Henry George Edition
of The Independent.) -
Thesingle tax system of taxation
as advocated by Henry George com
mends itself to me because, while it
s revolutionary, it would eradicate
from our present industrial system
only that which is bad, arid would
conserve that which is good. The sin
gle tax is both radical and conserva
tive, in the best sense of those terms.
It would leave undisturbed the com
mercial structure, eliminating only
the element of monopoly. It is emi
nently practicable, and easy of ap
plication " ;-
We who have carefully watched its
steady progress fof the past dozen
years have reason to believe that the
single tax will soon be an absorbing
issue in American politics. That a
man of the calibre of Tom L. John
son, one who has been highly success
ful in business, and is likely to be
our next president, should at the same
time be the foremost representative.
single taxer in the country, speaks
well for the early acceptance of the
philosophy of Henry George.
HENRY WARE ALLEN.
El Paso, Tex. . .
ON LAND VALUES
(Written for Henry George Edition
of The Independent.)
The single tax is not a tax on land,
although many persons think it is.
No, it is not a tax on land, but on
the value of land.
Now some will say, What is the
difference? The difference is as fol
lows, a tax on land would be a tax
of some certain amount levied on each
acre of the farm, or each front foot of
a city lot, whereas a tax on the value
of land would be a tax levied on the
amount the land would sell for, after
the value of all improvements, houses,
barns, fences, drainage, etc., was de
ducted from the total value.
Copies of a short, brief and pithy
address to farmers, by the Hon. Tom
L. Johnson of Cleveland, O., In which
he explains this point very clearly
and fully, will be sent to any person
sending me their name and address
on a postal. ()
F. W. MAGUIRE.
159 So, Western ave., Chicago, 111
() Appears in this issue under the
title of "World Leader of New Cru
sade" by Mr. Vlning.
People who own any land at all
have three kinds of interests one as
a landlord In the ownership of his
bare land, Old as a capitalist In the
ownership o! Improvements and per
sonal property, and one as a laborer
with hand or brain In the production
of new, wealth. As labor in production
Will be three or more times as well
paid under the single tax as it is now
It follows that unless the rent of his
bare land is greater than the Interest
on his capital . and three times the
yearly earnings of himself and family
he would be benefited by the single
tax. W. it. T. Wakefield.
HOW TUB SINGLE TAX MAY BE
ADOPTED
' (Written for Henry George Edition
of The Independent)
; We sometimes hear that in order
to support the federal, state and lo
cal government by a tax on land val
ues it will be necessary to create en
tirely new systems of assessment and
taxation, and although the question
has often been answered it is still
asked whether a tax on land values
will be sufficient for all governmental
purposes.
The census reports showing the
wealth and taxation of the United
States for 1900 have not been pub
lished, and we must therefore use
the figure? for 1890. However, the
proportion between land values and
expenses of government must be sub
stantially the same now as then, so
that the fig-ares for 1890 . will serve.
By the census of 1890 the total an
nual expenses of government, na
tional, state and local, amounted to
$877,054,820. The total annual ground
rent was in excess, of . $1,591,793,000.
Of this total expense of government
about $211,793,000 was then paid by
a tax on land values It is evident,
therefore, that even if allowance is
made for, error the annual ground
rentals of the country are ample for
every governmental need.
In every state a large part of pres
ent revenue is raised by a tax on land
values, and all the machinery neces
sary for assessment and collection is
found in existing law.
The problem is to raise revenue for
federal government, state, county and
local government, and it is believed
that the most practicable plan Is to
begin with local government To this
end local option in taxation is desir
able. By this is meant a grant of
power by state legislatures to the
counties or towns to exempt trom
taxation personal property and im
provements on land. The constitu
tions of eight states contain ho pro
vision to prevent such a grant of pow
er, and in seventeen states there is
no constitutional barrier to the ex
emption of any class of property by
the legislature itself.
If local option is granted in any
state, revenue for state purposes may
properly be obtained by a tax upon
counties (including, all smaller divi
sions) in proportion to the total local
revenues. This removes any objec
tion to the exemption of property
from taxation in one part of the state
when there is no such exemption in
other parts of the state. This pla a
of apportionment of the state tax m
proportion to local revenue does away
with the present inequalities due to
varying ratios of assessment, and
more nearly apportions the burden in
accordance with land values. Rev
enues are always larger in cities than
in rural districts in proportion to tne
assessed values, of all property and
land values are always higher in cit
ies in proportion to the total as
sessed values of all property. When
all revenue is derived from a tax on
land values, apportionment on tha
basis of revenue will be substantially
the same as apportionment on .the
basis of annual ground rent.
The federal constitution provides
that direct taxes shall be apportioned
in accordance with population. A di
rect tax on land values for federal
purposes, therefore, requires an
amendment to the federal constitu-;
tion, but the federal government may j
be supported by a tax on the Income
of state and local governing bodies
without changing the federal consti
tution. For reasons already given
this apportionment of federal revenue
wiir be fair to the poor states and im
pose the heaviest burden where it
should be placed on states rich in
land values.
The burden of supporting all
branches of government may be ap
portioned as follows: Revenue fo.
the federal government is to be ap
portioned to the states in proportion
to the local revenue of each state and
of the governing bodies within ItRev-
enue for each state and the sum the
state must pay to the federal govern
ment will be apportioned to the coun
ties or towns in proportion to their
local " revenue. The counties and
towns will raise all revenue by a tax
on land values only.
The changes in existing law which
must be made are almost solely in
the nature of repeal. We already
have a tax on land values and the
machinery for assessing and collect
ing It This machinery, may be im
proved, but" it does, not have to b3
created.'' Wevmust exempt from the
operation of the existing law all prod
ucts Of labor and the paper evi
dences of th4 ownership of property
or of an Interest in property, and all
evidences of indebtedness.
The proportion between the revenue
to be raised for federal, state, coun
ty, and local purposes may be ascer
talned from the census. If the plan.
outlined should be adopted, out of ev
ery hundred dollars raised for gov
ernmental pui poses $34 would go to
federal government, $13 to the state,
$15 to the county, and $38 for town,
city and village purposes. This U
the average for the whole United
States, but of course in many states
county government amounts to very
little, as for example in Connecticut
and Rhode Island, : while in other
states, as New York, county govern
ment is an important branch charged
with duties which involve the ex
penditure of a considerable proportion
of the total ievenue.
The proportion of the revenue' now
required for the federal government is
largely in excess of that which would
be required vnder the single tax,; for
we should save immense sums by -the
abolition of the expenses of collect
ing customs duties and internal rev
enue. The cost of determining the
share which each state should pay
would be trilling compared with the
expense of maintaining the army of
employes for the collection of the
present taxes and the prevention : of
frauds upon the revenue.
LAWSON PURDY.
-New York, N. Y. .
WEIGH
T
HE
MRS. EGGLEST0N FEARED HER
REASON WOULD GIVE WAY
Solicitude of Her Neighbors Resulted la
the Relief of the Unfortuaate Woman
Mrs. Eagles ton InterTiewed
"There seemed to be a heavy weight
crushing down on the top of my
head," said Mrs. Kate Eggleston, of
No. 126 Ohio street, Indianapolis, Ind.,
"and for days and days at a time I
was obliged to stay in bed. -Every
attack of this trouble would leave me
weak and worn out So many excel
lent doctors treated me without suc
cess 'that I just resigned myself to my
fate I lost hope. There were many
times when I feared my reason would
give way.
"A nervous affliction developed
which affected my muscles and at
times I could not control them. I
could not sleep soundly, I lost flesh
and appetite and was ."miserable.
"A. neighbor called one day and told
me of some of the cures that had been
made by Dr. Williams' Pink Pills tor
Pale People and I promised her to try
them. Relief came with the first box
and I Improved steadily until, by the
time four boxes were taken, I was
perfectly cured and I have had no re
turn of the trouble since."
The pills which cured Mrs. Eggles
ton are not a patent medicine but a
prescription used for many years by
an eminent px'actitioner who produced
the most wonderful results with them,
curing all kinds of weakness arising
from a watery condition of the blood
or shattered nerves, two fruitful
causes of almost every ill to which
flesh is heir. Acting directly on the
blood and nerves these pills have
proved a boon to women, invigorating
the body and regulating the functions
of the exhausted patient.
Dr. Williams' Pink Pills for Pale
People have been proven to be a cer
tain remedy for such diseases as lo
comotor ataxia, partial paralysis, St.
Vitus' dance, sciatica, neuralgia, rheu-
matism," nervous headache, the after
effects of the grip, palpitation of the
heart, pale and sallqw complexions
and all forms of-weakness either in
male or female. Dr. Williams' Pink
Pills for Pale People are sold by all
dealers, or will be sent postpaid on
receipt of price, fifty cents a box;
six boxes for two dollars and a half,
by addressing Dr. Williams Medicine
Co., Schenectady, N. Y. Look for the
full name on every package you buy,
HORSE COLLARS
'W aftWBBS
HtM
AjKYOU&deaurtoshoWII
BEFORE YOU BUY.
ANUFACTURtO Bt
HARPHAM BROS.CO.
Lincoln, Neb.