Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The independent. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1902-1907 | View Entire Issue (May 14, 1903)
lb THE NEBRASKA INDEPENDENT. MAT 14, 1903. A Tax cn Land Values. (Continued, from rage 2.) protection of . government, tend to raise land values. They tend to strengthen the power of land owners -as a whole, as a class, as benefic iaries of a financial Interest they tend to augment the power of this financial interest to exact higher prices and rentals for the privilege of using socialized land. Just as in the street illustration, the land owner gets the same benefits that others get from eoclety, but he gets an advant age besides: his peculiar property, es sentially a monopoly of nature, in m-iana In value. -Let us take another illustration- one upon a large scale. Compare me real e'state values in Boston In Will wiih those of the same city in 1876, a' quarter of a century earlier. I re fer you to Boston, because there tna value of the land is separated from the value of buildings. This jnakes a comparison possible ,and I submit this comparison to you: .... Land. Buildings. 1901 $547,246,600 $377,790,90i. 1876 T .... S20.133.375 206.024,525 Increase .....$227,113,225 $171,766,375 In round numbers, in terms of val ue, there is an increase in twenty five years of $227,000,000 for land, and only $172,000,000 for buildings. That in itself is suggestive. But the thing of chief Importance is that the in crease in tho building values implies more buildings, whereas the increase in the land values does not Imply more land. The land is precisely what it was before. The only, differ ence regarding it is that it now is In greater demand. Social advances and governmental protection have en hanced its exchangeability. And they have done so to a degree, in twenty five years,' which is measured in the market by $227,000,000. This value does not measure the exchangeability of artificial things produced and traded, as does the value of houses; it measures the exchangeability of natural and social opportunities for production and trade. What is thus true of Boston is true of every progressive community in the civilized world. As a community progresses, the affected area of land increases in value without increasing in quantity or quality, while the sum total of improvements increases in value only as it increases in quan tity or quality. Is it not evident that here is a radical difference, of which systems of taxation should take no tice? ; Jt is precisely this difference that underlies the principle we have before us. When we say that all public rev enues should be derived from a tax on land values, we mean that the taxes exacted of me a should be levied in pro portion to the value of their land be cause this is an advantage they de rive from society, and not in propor tion to what they earn by producing valuable objects, which is a benefit they create for themselves. To use Boston for a concrete illustration, the single tax this tax exclusively upon land values would be measured, not by the millions of private improve ment values, for those values repre sent what are justly private earnings. It would be measured by the two hun dred and twenty-seven millions of land values; for they represent what are justly public earnings what are just ly common earnings. Consider what this change in taxa tion would xlo. It would exempt In dustry, enterprise and thrift from fiscal burdens, and thereby foster the production and secure the enjoyment of wealth. That consideration alone justifies the . change. But there is more to consider. Look about you and see the vacant land which Is held out of use, or put only to poor use, and yet is measured for exchange in term3 of high value. ,It is held out of use because its own ers look to the future, and measure it at more in value than it is worth for present purposes. Let the mind grasp the facts, and this becomes the most Impressive economic phenome non of our time. You may observe it in every city and town, and all over the country. Nowhere can you es cape it, hot even in the desert Boston furnishes a typical instance. We must go to Boston again for an illustration, because her tax system supplies data. ' According to the re turns of Boston for 1901, the vacant land in that city amounted to no less than 56 per cent of the whole taxed area of the city. And this means; va cant land that 13 absolutely vacant Land that Is improved at all, however inadequately, is not put into the ya f ant column. , . . . -- . , - Not only does this phenomenon of valuable vacant land held out of use for higher prices manifest itself there, and In other cities, and in the towns and villages of the country; it is to be found, also, in the mining regions, in the timber regions, in the farming re gions, and wherever else society has advanced or is advancing. " Think of the tremendous industrial forces that are held in check by that enormous monopolization of land land which no one can touch for in dustrial purposes without first mort gaging his future. Men are thereby forced to go to poorer lands, and thus all the productive power, of labor as a whole, of business as a whole, . is checked. A smaller quantity of con sumable objects is consequently pro duced with a eivsn expenditure of ef fortsmaller than could and would be produced with the same effort if the natural and social opportunities were not forestalled. The influence or this condition in restricting the production of wealth i3 incalculable. Its influence in diverting wealth from those who earn it to those who merely appropriate it is enormous. Its Influ ence in perpetuating poverty : among tne worKers, and in stimulating crime in low places and high, is oversha dowing. . All those effects of social injustice would sink Into insignificance, or dis appear entirely, if public revenue were derived exclusively from land values. The explanation is simple. If this reform were adopted, men would be taxed Onlv in proportion to the land they monopolize. They would be taxed regardless of whether their, land were used or not, provided only it were tradable for consumable objects and could therefore be measured in the market In terms of value." This tax would necessarily be so high relative ly to land values that no one could af ford to monopolize valuable; land no one could afford to hold out of uso any land for whieh there wag a Ho. mand. Consequently .industry wouli utilize Detter lands than now; would Utilize better lands UDon easier terms than it now utilizes the poorer; and witn equal or less effort would pro duce a lareer aeereeate of wealth a nd distribute larger shares among the worKers. For Competition would he free on 1 freedom of competition would solve J 1 -m a a - me industrial problem. It would en able all of us to bargain on ermal terms. No one would have an advant age of life and death over any one else. Competition, would solve tho in dustrial problem, not in favor of th'j mier, wnether poor or rich, but in favor of the worker, wheth er rlh or poor. The plundering power of privilege would De gone. " : I am aware of the prejudiceagainst competition. But they have no foun- aauon. competition, free competi tion, is not warfare. It Is emulation. Its victories are not to he likened to those, of a bloody battlefield nor to those of the fierce struggle for exist ence among wild animals, where the gains of the victorious are at the ex pense or the vanquished. The victor ies of free competition fn the tnne. trial world are more like those of th;5 scnooi room, where even he who loses the prize nevertheless retains all that he has gained in his struggle for it. no ones gam is another's loss. It is not free competition that has produced the monopolies of which w complain today. These are the nat ural fruit, not of unshackled compe tition, but of the systems of monop oly, with which in varying ways and degrees competition has been shack led all down the centuries. We have not progressed through competition to monopoly. There has been no free competition In historical times. There is such a thing as historical evolution, of course, but evolution produces each thing after its own kind. Monopoly leads to the perfection of monopoly; free competition leads on to the per fection of freedom. We cannot safe ly depend, then, upon social evolution for the beneficent social conditions we dream of, unless we give to social evolution a beneficent direction. If we foster social disease, social dis ease will evolve; if we foster social health, social health will evolve. To foster monopoly Is to strengthen mo nopoly, and to tolerate it is to foster it- It is like weeds in a garden. Of all monopolies, only two are fun damental; one Is enslavement of men, the other is monopoly of land. Abol ish all others, but retain either of these, and you have a germ that will propagate injustice In spite of all your philosophies and in spite of all you? laws. Enslavement of men has about passed away. It did not evolve away. It was attacked and destroyed by men who placed moral righteousness above all utilitarian considerations. , Monopoly of land has not yet passed 1 away. The struggle for its abolition: is just in Its earlier stages. But that struggle has begun, and it is a strug gle that will not end until land mo nopoly has also passed away, like its twin sister in Iniquity. This, too, is a struggle of right against might. And in this struggle we find the sin gle tax serving the uses of the pio neer. Not the least of its recommen dations is that It offers a simple and practicable method for the restoration to all of their natural inheritance in the land "which the Lord their God hath given them." For this fiscal theory Is a. theory that would work in practice. As a matter of fact, every sound theory will work in practice. - A theory that will not work in practice is not a sound theory. vThat ha3 often, been said. But even the soundest theory will not work in practice until you prt it in practice -This theory, however, while sound itself, and entirely practicable, so practicable that it would produce the most , useful results, rests upon a deeper principle , than utility alone It rests upon the eternal principle of justice. While we are prepared to de fend it upon utilitarian grounds, we believe that the moral righteousness of the proposition is in itself a sure guarantee of , its highest usefulness. Any proposition . J which is morally right will prove to be practicable and beneficial if adopted; and upon that principle, fundamentally, we rest our claims for the single tax. v The Same Old Story A TWENTIETH CENTURY CHILD'S v- .. . . INQUIRY and A TWENTIETH CENTURY FATHER'S REPLY. (How Big Was Alexander, Pa, Up- to-date.) Child ' Oh tell me what's this "Merger," pa, that's frightening folks out west? That governors try to kill it and courts have done their best Is it a deep-sea monster so very long . and round, That when its head is in New York : its tail's on Puget Sound? Father . It's the some old story, child, with some new-fangled name, That's wrecked the lives of all man- kind; its fruits are just the same. Just now It's narrow strips of land and rails from sea to sea It's monopoly pure and simple, c.3 plain as plain can be. Those who control these strips of land usurp a right divine Which once was claimed by men now dead, the "Robbers of the Rhine. With these land strips a corporal's guard may prove more potent far To Wreck the lives of those they reach than e'en the gods of war. Child - - But, pa, do men who sing the praise of Jathers brave and free, s 'Mid plenty starve and die as in tfie picture here I see? Do sons of sires of seventy-six, in ail these rail-striped regions, Fear more a corporal's guard than they did all King George's legions? Father t Your query pains me sore, my child, but you will live to see That men today are nothing loth to prove their birthright free. Our fathers served their tea quite well with pain and patient toil Their sons may likewise prove them selves by '.'dumping" Standard Oil. The trouble, child, is blinded faith in laws by dead men made, Encouraged by designing men who thrive by this same trade. But now a bow of promise shines wide o er the eastern lawn A western tuneful lay to greet th? lark's note in the dawn. F. M. MARQUIS. Milwaukee, Wis. Organizations Although more 'than one hundred disciples of Henry George have fav ored The Independent with well writ ten arguments covering all important subdivisions of the single tax philos ophy, none of them have noticed the editor's suggestion that an article on organizations and another on bibli ography would be timely. . It may be that the single taxers do not care to tell their strength. Yet the sentiment expressed by Mr. Weeks would indicate the opposite. And the fact that so many single tax organi zations offer free literature to all who apply for it, would also seem to con firm the opposite view. In any event, I have collected as much information as I could from the various newspa pers and magazines, and offer the fol lowing. It is incomplete; but will give some idea of what is going on n the single tax world. The Henrv Georae association of Chicago; headquarters, 356 Dearborn st : officers. Frederick H. Monroe. president; A. Adelman, vice presi dent; u. a. n. ureene, treasurer; a. S. Rosing, financial secretary; L. S. Dickey, general secretary: Miss Olive Maguire, assistant secretary; F. W. Maguire, noranan; ii. u. Loomis, chairman lecture bureau; George V. Wells, chairman ' press bureau: Dr. Anna M.' Lund, chairman music com mittee; Miss Leonora Beck, chalrmaa social committee; executive commit tee, Edward Osgood Brown, chairman; Hamlin GarlaDd, Louis F Post, Joha Z. White, Frank D. Butler, H. S. Hyman, J. E. Eagle, D wight H. Perk ins, James Westfall Thompson, Robert C. Spencer, jr., Wm. M. Salter, W. H. Burke, Trumbull White; M. F. Bing ham, T. J; Amberg, Hon. Michael E. Maher, Jay D. Miller, a L. Moulton. Rev. Thos. E. Cox, Western Starr, L. G. Bostedo, Gen. Herman Lieb, Mur ray C. - Mayer, Fay Lewis. This as sociation furnishes lecturers free, gives a free lecture in Chicago every Thursday evening throughout the vear on economic subjects. This evening tMay U) Albinus A. Worsley, of Wis onsin (who is well known to Ne braska populists) ffives a review of Clarence S. Darrow's "Resist ' Not Evil." Manhattan Single Tax club: on Mav 15-will occupy new permanent home at zzt uast cznd st. New York city. women's single Tax club of New Haven, Conn. Women's National Single Tax league, Mrs. John S. Crosby, president, 335 West 14th st, New York city; third annual conference to be held in New Haven, Conn., at invitation of the Women's Single Tax club of that city, June 25-27, 1903; delegates will be given a reception by Mrs. Ella" Wheeler Wilcox at her summer resi dence, Short Beach. Fairhope Single Tax Colony, Fair hope, Ala.; described elsewhere in this issue; send 2c stamp for copy of Fairhope Courier. Washington Single Tax club,, Wash ington, D. C. Mobile Single Tax club, Mobile, Ala. Single Tax league, Denver, Colo. Connecticut Single Tax league; or ganized Jan. 8, 1903; C. W. Dougherty, president, Hartford; W. T. Brewer, vice president, Meriden; W. Trueman, secretary-treasurer, New Haven. Chicago Single Tax club, 508 Schil ler building; meets every Friday even ing in Schiller Hall, 109 East Ran dolph st; officers, Thomas Rhodus, president; E. C. Moeller, vice presi dent; P. Cullman, jr., corresponding secretary; Geo. C. Olcott, financial secretary; W. D. Tate, recording sec retary; Geo. J. Foyer, secretary cam paign committee. Ohio Single Tax league; officers, Wm. Radcliffe, president, Youngs town; Otto K. Dorn, vice president, . Cleveland; J. B. Vining, secretary treasurer, Cleveland; governing board, F. H. Howe, Columbus; Daniel Kie fer, Cincinnati; O. P. Hyde, Mariet ta; James McBride, Akron; Thomas Hunt, Kennedy; ; F. H. Augspurger, Trenton. Reform clug, Youngstown; O. ; "Bil ly Kadcliffe, S. T.," and John F. Con roy look after the single tax here. , Bigelow Press Bureau; Daniel Kie fer, secretary, 3596 Wilson ave.. Cin cinnati, O.; furnishes newspapers with abstracts of sermons delivered by Herbert S. Bigelow, pastor of the Vine Street Congregational church. Single Tax association of Montreal, Quebec, Canada; T. C. Allum, sec retary. Single Tax association of Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Walter H. Roebuck, secretary, 155 Bay st. Women's Henry George league of New York; a letter addressed to 113 West 79th st, New York, would doubtless reach the proper officers. Brooklyn Sinale Tax leas-ue? Rinh. "ard George, president; T. P. Ryan, vice president; E. B. Swlnney, 1467 Bedford ave., secretary; Reuben Free man, 890 Sterling Place, treasurer; executive committee, Miss Ida Clen denin, E. Corkill, John Filmer, J. P. Kohler, Miss Jennie A. Rogers. Marietta Single Tax club; P. Hyde, secretary, Marietta, O. Maryland Single Tax association;' organized 1894; Dr. Wm. N. Hill, treasurer of the executive committee, Baltimore. Cincinnati Single Tax club, room 11, Hulbert block, cor. 6th and Vine, Cin cinnati, O. . Amarillo Single Tax club; J. Li Caldwell, president, Amarillo, Tex. Massachusetts Single Tax league;' C. B. Fillebrown, president, 68 Essex st, Boston. The Single Tax society of Philadel phia; Mrs. Florence A. Burleigh, sec retary, Germantown, Pa. CHARLES Q. DE FRANCE. Farmers, Attention! Do you wish to sell your farm? If so, send full description, lowest price and best terms." Or, if you wish to buy a farm, ranch or Lincoln, home, write to or call on Williams & Bratt, 1105 O st, Lincoln, Neb. The Post-Clark debate in full may. be had by sending 25c for the Spring Number of the Single Tax Review.. 11 Frankfort st, New York, N. Y.