The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1883-09-23

Jtked lne pohitiVh bhnO S"iL
munity OF lands, however desirable,
Is incoml ltib with justice, because it
would be manifest injustice to break u o
covenant which the commonwealth hes
allowed to DO made between individual"
Tao reply to which is q Il. d., the very
pint to be proven. We will now explicitly
STATE this Individual land ownership que.
ton: LIST, whether land ownership is
founded on right; 2nd, If not, what of the
eIpediency oGits abolition. There are three
positions taken by those who severally con-
test the right. One class contend that
property in land is monopoly, but
Que which 10 necessary, and,
therefore, not to De disturbed.
Another class argue that such monopoly
should be abolished, but fairly comper
ssled for to the owners. The third class IN
slst that tho monopoly, being all founded
on wrong, and being detrimental to the
general interests, should be stricken liom
existence as an unwarranted u'urpatiou.
They all are unanimous, however, that the
rlnl FROM this monopoly is the produce T
the powers OF nature, acting through Il
snl, which are Of right the common 10.
There are but thr'e sources OF incOn
known to political economy, wage
profits and rent. Now tho wages of the
laborer and The profits Of the capitalist are
the roeompense, tho one of trouble OF
pains taken, ihe ether OF pIlvation sub
mitted to, and risk encountered, white
rent Is received by the proprietor gralu
tously, aud in Virtae Of legal convention &.
The foundation Of the right to property 10
what no has produced. From this right
and title flows the legitimacy of transfer y
exchange, bequest, etc. Under this fnndi-
mental idea. nothing ought really to be
treated m property which has beer
acquired by force or fraud, o.
appropriated Ia ignorancs Of prior title
slsswise invested. Now. land 10 one OF
those things that no one has produced al,
m ,ro than he has produced water, that
her portion Of the globe, or tho air or the
sunlight. Laud is the original inheritance
OF the whole human family, and rs parcel
ling out under tho fee simple plan was, as
It is to-day, question Of eXpediency.
As an institution, private ownership o.
property was not at first determined by
consideration OF utility. Tho object Of the
early legal tribunals was not to adiu1 icate
aud establish rights, but to repress violence
and settle quarrels. Hence they natural y
enough gave legal effect to the Ist occr-
panoy by treating as the aggressor, q o
person who first commenced violence by l.
tempting to turn another out OF position.
For pruder tial reasons lapse OF time stnc-
titled the original wrong under The c, n
yentionAl ruling, and thus under the
mechanism Of the social organization what
was indeed an invasion and a conllsoation
was thus permitted TO exist as alHcd AID
as heritable right,
The truth Is that land, the soil, iinoth'
| ing but an instrument from which uudt
the powers of our nature applied t.
and cooperating with Its capacities
W. obtain produce. ny
MANS services II produces certain objects o
desire. that is to say, OF value, These ser
vices mako these objects our properties
This law evidently does no, apply to Tho
land itself. Cultivation gives no right
to II, Who shall say, II squaucd here ant
took poss seion OF this tract; cut down tn,
trees and tho fruits and the grasses, and
planted corn and turnips and strawberries
instead, aad hence should be the owner
DO such pioneering manipulations begtt I
trus titlep How, In tho name OF common
seuac, can they effect title, any more thtI
a squatler taking possession Of cabin cal
create title by his fencing 1t about, AM
whltewashing II, and doing such othti
things as his fancy might suggest, whet
the true owner comes along to demand "
The true owners OF the soil were the human
T CO In common,
1t ought never to be pretended, says Nm
SPENCER, that existing Titles to land are
strictly legitimate, AS has been said, 1t 1,
historical that force, fraud aud cunning prt
the sources to which those titles may b,
traced; and that blows were the current
in given in payment, aud for seals blood
was used In preference to wax, Then
what becomes o, the pretensions OF all sub
slquent holdetsp Does sple or bequest
convey right where Il did not previously en-
islp Aud II one act oi transfer can give nc
tile, can maulI No; nothing multiplied
forever will not produce one" True, time
m " be a great legaliEsr, but how long
does IL require for what was origlnally d
wrong to grow inIoa rightp II title grow,
perfect in 1000 years, how much more per.
feet will II bs IN 1900 years.
The only true way, however, TO test the
qaestion OF the value OF individual owner
ship OF land and that Of ownership by the
c,mmonw ealth. Is to observe the working Of
the systems, each In its best form aud un.
der It's best conditions. We are by l
means an enthusiastic advocate for the
quick abolition ofthe present state OF affairs
not even by excessive taxation OF land
values; II would be 80 radical u change that
we would fear the results, aud I, nigh, be
better to endure the ills We have than 10
ny to others that we know not Of The
better mode would be a gradual change.
As Mn. GEoRoEhas himself somewhere
remarked, II is an axiom OF slatesmanShip
that great changes can best be brought
about under old forms; this is the natural
method Tor when nature would make n
higher type, she takes lower one aud de.
velops IL.
There is at least certainly something
radically wrong somewhere In the social
adjustments that causes all this modem
progress to make each year sharper con.
irasls between "the Home OF Have and the
House OF waut,n that despite the steam