page e
G6 j Nebraska Independent
DECEMBER 14 19CS
o
a
o
o
Letters From The People
a
o
a
o
a
' , Suggestions For Single Taxers ;
. ' Lexington, Ind., Nov. 9. To 4 the Editor of
The Independent: If you will" kindly8 give me 1
'apace I , would Jike to have a word with single
taxers It is my opinion that It would be nec
essary , to ' reduce the legal rate ; of Interest on
Clpney and, all . evidence of "debt before the single
tax plan would operate successfully and Justly.
Many farms " are mortgaged for . more than the
appraisement for taxes. , Reduce the rate of in
terest on the mortgage and "double the tax on the
land and ,the farmer will have ,a balance In his
favor.;.-1 suppose that the several states when
fixing a legal rate of Interest have reckoned a
higher rate on account of the, tax to be paid
on money and other evidences of debt.'
' ,! ;Thiere Is 'another item of expense that the
single tax plan might greatly reduce, that is in
making an assessment of all property once ' a
year. ; It is not necessary to appraise land more
than once in four years and it requires less than
half the . time .to appraise the land tftat it re
quires to assess the personal ' property. ; The
single tax plan would save the taxpayers seven
eighths of this expense. Still another item we
might reduce a part of the work and expense of
the county treasurer and auditor. , "
I would like some one who is well informed
to make an estimate of the benefit the single tax
would give the taxpayers along the lines I have
mentioned.
H.--C. GUYUN.
When Justice Reigns
ouuiu yjiiidua. neuin iuy. lo. iu me HiUimr
of The Independent: I have just finished reading
the issue of The Independent of the 23rd, and
want to compliment you on the high Btahdard of
your editorials in that issue. I was especially
interested in your editorial, "The Role of Charity."
With some of your conclusions, however, I take
issue. Possibly it Is true that "the poor will
always, be with us" in the sense that there will
always be derelicts on life's sea. Those who
from mental incapacity or physical deformity are
unable to perform, their allotted task in life.
And1 for these as civilization advances the
community or state will care with the same ten
der regard that the loving father and mother
cares for the helpless infant. That poverty and
want in .the accepted sense of the word is nec
essary or that it will always exist I do not be
lieve. Year ago I read Henry George's master
piece from a master mind, "Progress and Pov
erty,, and I remember that he exploded the old
fallacy of. the inherent selfishness of humanity
as thoroughly as he did the Malthusian theory
of the pressure of population against the means
of subsistence.
Since that time I have observed with more
or less care all classes of men, and I believe
that only as men become imbued with the cus
toms and ideas of their environment and the
teachings of a false system of economics do they
become selfish and careless of the rights of
others. A vast majority of men, even in this
sordid commercial age, would rather do a kind
ness than an Injury to their fellow men. And
it is only aa they become immersed in the strug
gle for existence that they forget that they are
in a measure responsible for the welfare of their
fellow men. In the life of a nation a century
is as a day. And viewing the future in the light
of the past it seems to me the optimist can
see a brighter day when poverty, want and
crime will be minimized, if not eliminated, and
when justice, charity and brotherly love will bo
the. rule and not the exception. Eighteen cen
turies ago the Carpenter of Nazareth gave this
commandment: "Thou ehalt love the Lord thy
God with all thy soul and with all thy strength
and thy neighbors as thyself." And when the
Christian world understands that this means not
a passive love that will prevent one from wil
fully Injuring, another, but an aggressive love
that will resent an injury to one's follow man
with the same vehemence that wo resent a per
sonal injury. Then will the. cause of humanity
nd justice advance with great strides.
J. W. JORDAN.
form of government and would wipe it out and
substitute s monarchy or an aristocracy instead.
Mn Bancroft asks: ! ; ' ' ' 1
"Would ndt aristocracy solve the negro prob
lem in this country?" I answer no. If it had
not been for the aristocracy there would have
, been no slavery, and 'hoi negro problem td solve.
The only solution of the negro problem offered
by the aristocracy is some method by which the
constitution of the United States can be evaded
or trampled upon. ,; i ; ' i ' "';
. Again Mr. Bancroft asks: "Can any one dis
pute that democracy and the denial of equal
rights to the negro are incompatible?" Of course
they are - incompatible. Genuine democrats do
not believe in depriving the negro of equal rights
and protection under the law. They approve so
cial equality, but they have' no sympathy , with'
the tricks, devices, fraud and farce by which
negroes -are often denied equal protection under
the law. A government of the people, by the
, people and for the people is the only govern
ment based on "divine rights."
L. J. MURRAY.
Democracy vs. Aristocracy
Eajglo Paw, Texas, IH 1,To the Kdltor of
The Indpeudent: In reply lo Herbert Bancroft's
letter pubtlshvd Iu Tha Independent of November
23, 1 will say that I am not surprised that men
ran bo found who favor government by aristoc
racy. Mr. Bancroft I oppo.od to our present
; Socialist Statistics " - v ' '
Reading, Mass., Dec. 4. The trouble with
our socialist friends is that they see things that
never happen. . - v . . '
A socialist organ which just came in says'
editorially that in a short time "we will be con-
fronted with 10,000,000 unemployed." I suppose
it does these calamity howlers good to howl and
it doesn't do-the rest of us much harm. Our
friend Obenchain tries awfully hard to make out
a case for himself but fails entirely. He has
published,:' no proof whatever that the middle,
class are , disappearing; not a bit, nor can he.
The statistics which appeared in The Independent
of November 9, disprove the socialist contention '
absolutely. Why Sanill in his "Socialist Alma
nac" admitted that the middle class were not
disappearing in "numbers", but were, he said,
in "quality." ; . ; ' ;
If manufacturing plants increased much
faster in the two decades from 1880 to 1906 than "
from 1870 to 1880, which they did, that is only
another proof that that part Of the middle class '
is increasing faster now than thirty years ago.
And mark you this great increase of the middle
class has taken place at a period when this na
tion was receiving an average of more than
400,000 Immigrants annually, 95 per cent or
more of whom were "working people" i. e. not
middle class. I mean during the past ten years.
Now then, the real question or rather the two
questions at issue, is the middle class disap
pearing and is, it true that the workers .receive
only one-fifth of what they produce? I chal
lenge Obenchain or any other socialist to prove
either contention.
When Mr. Obenchain talks about our being
able to produce six yards of cloth or shoes or
anything, when we could only produce one be
fore he seems to imagine that that is all there
is to the story. He forgets that we are able to
produce more and more, not because we do more
and moro work, but because we have better ma
chinery and better organization. That is. the in
ventors and organizers make it possible to do
this. And it Is the genius of the few that makes
possible cheaper production. Capital doesn't re
ceive any greater reward today, dollars for dol
lars, than it did fifty years ago. On the other
hand, labor is paid at least 100 to 150 percent
better than fifty years ago.
In 1837, '57 and '73 we had an unemployed
problem the like of which we will probably never
seo again. Yet the whole stock in trade of the
socialist is long drawn calamity howl, to-wlt:
that everything Is getting worse.
According to the "socialist statisticians'
labor receives one-fifth or 20 per cent of what
it produces, while capital receives four-fifths or
80 per cent. Of course no well Informed man
believes any such rot, even the New York Worker,
h loading ftoctaiut orfn of this nation replying
to an assertion of this kind In the Chicago So
cialist said that It was foolish to talk such non
sense, that It simply wasn't true, Perhaps our
Texas friend can convince this socialist editor
that he Is an Ignoramus but ho wont be'ablo to
convince anyone else, lt us see your statistics
Krlend Obenchain and lot ns see you demolish
thoae that I have furnished.
H may not da our friend any good to pub
lish more farm statistic but it may throw
a little more light on the subject. We find on
page 217 Abstract of United States census for 1900
the following:
Year. ' No. of Farms. Year No. of Farms;
1900.......... 5,737,372 1870 2,659,985
1890. 4,564,641 '. 18C0V..'. ...... 2,659,985
1880. ........ .4,008,907 1 1850. ,Vi ;VS. ,,1,449,073
, ; ; ' This shows that the number of farms .- In
creased from 1870 to 1900 by nearly 3, 100,000 or
a, greater per , cent than the increase in popula
tion. Also we find this: ,,v '
: Farm Value.
'..V Year. . (All property)
, 1900 . . .................. r. ....... . 20,439,901,164
; 1890;. . . . .... .... .......... 16.000.000.000
, , 1880 . . . . v. ... . . 12,000,000,00
;? 1870 ... ...... . . . . 11,000,000,000
i, I860; ...JV v.. ....... ....... ;. 000,000,000
; 1850 . . . . . , . . , . V ........ , . . 4,000,000,000
The census states that the 1870 valuation
' should be: one-fifth less than figures given, etc.
See page 217. Or less than 9,000,000,000 In 1870
against nearly twenty and one-half In' 1900, show-
JM m I XI J. 1 m m . . -
lug u&Ain mill, vaiue oi iarm property mcreasea
faster than population. We are. not talking about
the farm children that are employed in' the month,
' of June when the census is taken.' ' '
" And this reminds me that about every so
: cialist organ in the nation has published it that
there were 1,750,000, ."little children .employed in
, the mills and factories of this nation in 1900,"
whereas there were less than ; 285,000,' which is
about as near the mark as a socialist writer ever
' sets. 1 ; .
However, come on socialists with your won
derful statistics and let us see whether you are
. bluffing or, not. - ' ,
' .; - F. G. R. GORDON.
, Hbw Trusts Should -Be Fought
" Mill Creek, Pa.; Nov. 14 To the Editor of
The Independent: The socialists and single taxers
have a hearing in your columns. I may not-see
it as they do, but your columns , are open to me
also. So far as trusts, monopolies, combinations
to fix prices and rates and crushing of competi
tion are concerned, I'm with you against them.
We must buck their lines as a team. What's the
use of one member of Yale's team bucking into
Harvard's whole line? ' The government, is our
TOClTrl 'I'ho nnl rrnn r.. V.nm mi. 1 ,1.1
.v.uk.. wuij uuij.nc uavc, 1 uv vuiy one ioat
extortion would stop to say good morning to.
We can get a hearing from any big combine only
through congress. How they do kipk against all
organizations but their own! ''Come one. at' a
time, shippers and consumers, we can swallow
you as fast as you can come, but don't come in a
bunch. Don't organize. Don't stick together.
Don't support a paper that will tell on us, that
will expose our methods. It's not legal. It's not
constitutional. You have no say so collectively
as a body. We are organized but don't you
dare to organize. We wont listen to your rep
resentatives even though he be the president
nT tho nnltaA Ottltocs Tanon Itcfnnn VS yk
sia listens to him. All the nations of the earth
consult him. but our business is nnno nf hia huoi.
ness." How mighty, is concentrated capital!
We neighbors used to go "gigging" in olden
times. Say five of us. When dividing time came
the fish were piled in five lots or idles. One
man turtied his back. Another put his stick on
a pile and said, "whose is this?" The man with
his back turned said "Smith's" "Whose is this?"
pointing to another pile "Jones.'." And so on till
all fish were divided. But finally Mr. Stouta
great big fellow able to lick any two of us
moved Into our midst. The first time he went
fishing with us he carried the fish bag and when
we came to divide the fish he commenced by
putting his hand into the fish bag and handin
us such fish as suited him, He oblected to pu
licity. He wouldn't let us know how manv or
what-slzed ones we had caufht. Stout swore "he
could lick anv man who would insinuate that he
hadn't divided the fish fairlv. There was one
fool and cowsrd in our crowd. He took side
with Stout. That left us four to two. Three of
us tackled Stout and ono the fool. Stout nffer
he was licked, whined that "three to one was'nt
fair Plav." But since the firht wo have hsd
fair plav In dividing the fish and overvbody
knows it. Stout was a noor "glgger," The laborer
the farmer, etc., cancht most of the fish We
foueht Stout as an orsanlzatlon. Ho wanted to
lick us ono at a time.
"A pmr rnr.u iU t,f 0e jde. i,v tho ueotdn
and for the pooi lo." Is the wav lo divide tho fish"
Not a government if the people by tho trusts
ft? the trusts.
What a poliffrsl ei-clono wo are havln in
Pennsylvania! If tho domocrat eit lo i,U,(jJ,
iwrtvtsm out of tho debris thov will U all Tha
advantace taVon of iwrthan foltne bv rorruut
oHifrinns, shodd Inere-so tho tn lomndont vote
and W u like greased llshtnlug. U!cV and
powerful, '
G, conniN.