The Labor enquirer., 1886-12-04

Socialism. Here it is: I'VE hold with
Thomas Jefferson that the earth be.
longs to the living. and that one genera.
tion cannot grant away the equal right
of succeeding generations to its use." /"
! Now, it is historically true that Mr.
Jefferson was one of the most enlight.
ened publicists of any age, and his po
litical and social opinions were the most
advanced held by any statesman OF hi.
Town or anv rime. Not one of the Social.
lists would have been either obnoxious
or novel to his singularly philosophical
mind and noble sense Of justice. But
lust how the Socialists interpret Mr..
Jefferson to mean that there is no pri.
vate ownership In land, cannot make
out.
If ever the time shall come when pri-
vate ownership in land shall cease it
will then, and once for all, solve this
arm of the social problem. but this fea-
ture is only small part of the general
/ demand. You can easily see how five
men might come into the ownership OF
every acre of land in Great Britain.
Say that twenty men may own Devon
shire now, in fifty years one man might
own it and he might drive every man
off of every acre into the public high
ways, Just as now the Irish landlor ds
evict the tenants from their holdings in
Ireland. Four dukes own much of Scot
land and it is entailed from generation
to genera ion. 1t is only question Of
degrees. 1t is not inconceivable that one
man might own eventually half of Ari.
zona and according to our laws own 1t
absolutely and will it away absolutely
to one heir. A principle obviously
wrong.
So am driven to the honest conclu-
sion that the land ought not to belong to
the dead or to the unborn, but to the
living. But how the living are to get
their rights to the-land, and out of the
dead mans hand, and out of the hands
of the unborn l do not know, as at pres
ent the national izatlon of the land
seems impracticable. l can understand
theoretically how the government could
own and rent the land and how the la
borer should receive all the land pro-
duced beyond its rent. This is simple
Justice. But l do not believe that this
is the point from which to start in this
social reform. l repeat 1t is not pres
emily feasible. The next proposition of
the Social SITS has in it right and reason
that will strike the common mind and
heart of the people:
1--WE hold that all that is produced by
labor, whe her of hand or head, belongs
to the producer and should be secured
to him."
This is surely not an extreme state
ment of human rights. A man should
have what he earns. If the producer
should not possess what he produces,
who shculd7 But the exact fact now is
that the producer receives only q small
share of that which he produces. This
will make plain what l mean. During
the past ten years in this country the
earnings of money have been seven
times the earnings of labor Now, the
remedy for this evil is very simple
one. 1t could be enforced to morrow.
All strikes are crude, rough, self punish
ing and temporary expedlents that are
often, if not unusually, the diplomacy of
demsgogues and vagabonds.
But cooperation is matter Of figures
and bookkeeping. All that this de-
mand practically means Is this: The
head is worth so much and the hand is
worth 30 much and money Is worth 80
much; or, again, capital Is worth 80
much and labor is worth so much. Say
to each how much. In any business, in
any corporation, In any manufactory
pay capital its full value and labor its
full value, and then above these divide
equitably the profits. This done, and 1T
seems to me that the first and greatest
grievance OF the laborer is redressed.
In every instance where this has been
done npital has been remunerated and
labor as been prosperous and coz
tented.
The next proposition has to do with
the vital subject of taxation and is stated
as follows:
"We propose to abolish all taxation
upon buildings, improvements and other
things of human production, and by tax
ing the value of land alone to provide
for the purposes of common benefit. In
this way we propose to make it unproit-
able for monopolizers to hold lands,
mines, forest or city lots which they are
not putting to use, and by this means
to throw open to citizens who wish to
make themselves homes or employ their
labor in producing wealth, the abun-
dant opportunities of which our COM
mon Father has provided for His chill
dren."
l have no philosophic objection to
this scheme of taxation although it does
not fall in with the most thoughtful and
best elaborated systems of the German
and French social philosophers and
economists. The simplest method and
the honest method is that of direct tax
alton, supplemented with this scheme