The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1884-02-22
LAND REFORM.

This question is now the question
that is moving the minds of the mass
es, and wild theories are advanced as
cures that involve greater injustice
than the land laws of any country I'M
der the sun. "The sO-called owner Of
land is a thief" says Henry George.
"Pay no rent" says Parnell. Now
there is sound truth at the bottom of
these mems theories. No one ought
to own land, but any attempt to forci-
bly, take possession of land now
would be more injustice than was
done when the land was first taken
possession of. At present this great
question is centered on Ireland.
Landlordism is supposed to be the
grossest tyranny in that island, and is
held to be, if not a justification, at
least an excuse for outrages that dis
grace humanity. do not believe that
land should be owned, but let us look
calmly at the question as it now
stands. If man procures note by
fraud, and sells it to a man who does
not know Of the fraud, that man can
claim pay for the note. Why should
not this law apply to land? Do the
numerous generations that have
bought or inherited the land know of
any fraud in acts that took place hum
dreds of years ago? The title to land
in England and Ireland is just as
valid as the title to land in the United
States. Henry the Second of England
was told that for the performance of
certain acts he could take possession
of all he could conquer in Ireland.
He went and gave to his soldier chiefs
the land. Well. what does that differ
from our land? Englishmen came
here and took possession of the land
robbed and murdered the owners, and
who, when driven to madness and DIES.
pair, killed their oppressors, were
called red devils, and there were nc
newspapers to excuse their atrocities
We excuse ourselves by saying that
the Indians were few in number, and
they had no right to monopoliZe sc
much land that they could not use
According to my opinion, that no one
should own land, the act was a just
one, but on any other ground it was
theft just as the taking Of the land il
Ireland was. AS people advanced
from a state Of semi-barbarous com
munism, private ownership of lane
grew stronger, and now state Of
things came into existence that re
quires US to revert to first principles
We have no right to punish and ruiz
the community for the results of crime
net looked on as crime at the time il
was committed. But this is just what
socialism, communism and liberalism
wished to do. There is IN my opinion
a remedy that would gradually remove
the evil, and that without trenchine
on any of those rights that long usage
has made to appear equitable. Oh
course in the United Kingdom il
would require the abolition of entail
and primogenititre. No more land
should be sold, and every man on ar
irving at his majority should be en-
titled to take possession of, say one
hundred acres of land. All the i'm
provements he put on the land sho uld
be his personal property, which he
may sell to any one, providing the buy
er does not at the time have posses
sion of any land. Thus no person
could get hold of more than the guam.
tity Of land fixed by law, and the large
farms now owned would be gradually
broken up. On the death of any occu'
pant of any land thus obtained the
law, unless the heirs could agree
should decide to whom the land should
go, and the one taking the land should
pay just share of the improvements
to the other heirs; but in no case
should any person add more land to
that which he held under the law.
r. G. S.