Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1883-05-13

LAND + Let the indvid-
uals who now hold it still re-
tain, if they want the possession
of what they are pleased 70 cal
their land. Let them buy and
sell and bequeath and devise il
tx 1t is not necessary to
confiscate land, it is only neces'
sary to confiscate rent"
Again at pages 364-5: "In
this way the State may become
the universal landlord
In form the ownership of land
would remain just as now. No
o,cner Of land need be dispossessed,
and no restriction need he placed
| upon the amount Of land any one
could hold"
At page $50 he says: "The
complete recognition Of con- m"n
rights to land, need in no way
interfere with the complete
recognition of individual right
to Improvement"
But the point under consider
alton is proved in another and
equally satisfactory way. George
does not propose to dispossess
present occupants for the benefit
of others. for that would be I'M
just. He does not propose
to confiscate prov e.
Ren.s or the rent of i'm
provements for that would be to
take not only the land, which is
common by nature--the BIRTH
right Of all-but the capital, the
wealth and the value of the use
Of wealth Of these, who by the
investment Of money and the
expenditure of labor have
caused the improvements to be
made. This would be agrarian-
ism Of the most detestable kind.
1t would he ro5bing the indus
trious and frugal for the benefit
ef the idle and improvident.
It would confiscate all existing,
and prevent all future improve
ment. No man would expand
money or labor in erecting
"A building for the public benefit.
George does not propose to
limit the quantity Of land which
may be occupied or used, for this
would discourage cultivation and
produce the precise opposite re-
suit from that desired. He does
not propose to deny the right to
lease or ALLEVIATE or devise or
change the course of descent for
this would also discourage I'M
provemeAt. No man would erect
valuable Improvements upon the
public land, if during his life
time they could be taken from
him, or if at his death, they es-
cheated to the Government, I'M
less in the form of rent he could
get back the money invested
with interest.
Thus we have shown what
the land scheme Of Henry
George is. We have shown,
az That he pro. oses TO make
land common property by APP
propriating fer the common BEN
eft, that is for the payment of
the expenses Of the Government,
the value of its use-the rent.
(2.) To effectuate this appro-
priation by levying il tax upon
land excluding improvements)
and exempting all other pro-
perry. (3) To increase this tax
without regard to the neces-
stiles for revenue but "as rent
or the value Of the use Of the
land advances" (4.) L" putno
restriction or limitation upon
the quantity Of land which may
be used or the power of inn
proving, leasing, alternating, de-
yising or inheriting the same.
1t is perhaps needless to add
that stripped of all rhetoric and
ohscuring verbiage the land
problem of Henry George means
nothing, absolutely nothing, ex-
cept the absorption of rent by
the imposition OF all taxes,
National, State and municipal,
upon land and appropriating the
money realized, not to individ-
ual and private uses, but to- gov
ornamental purposes.
Hereafter | will show that this
plan is impractical, unjust and
destructive of the best interests
Of society.
ROBT. NJ. CLARKE.