New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-12-08
500 fighting bucks and these would give any amount OF
trouble for in the impossible Everglades they could hold
at bay large opposing force.
HENRY GEORGE TO THE ARCHBISHOP

REPLY TO THE CRITICISMS ON HIS LAND THEORIES
IN TIE RECENT PASTORAL LETTER.
Henry George has written letter 10 Archbishop corri
gan reply to the presumed attack on his theories a"u'
pr sate property land contained In the ArcbDshoPs
recent pastoral letter. Tn substance Mr. George accuses
tho Archbishop OF confusing property with property
In land" anil Ownership" with nero POSSESSION y
Property in lana is not properly any legitimate
Mr. George aryaes has been recognized rs such only
20 lead to paur erism and disaster.
Mr. Georges letter begins by alleging that the Roman
Catholic Church has before felt called upon 10
place ITSELF the attitude OF sanctionug by It's teaohng
the right OF private property land Other prcstes
have been and are dlsbeever In such doctrine Tue
argument OF tho Archbishop, he continues reduces
itself to this syllogism:
The results OF human exertion property and may
righifullv De the object OF individual ownership.
aTnerofore land is rghtfry the object Of individual
ownership"
But 10 make the svllogism valid the miidle Term
must be changed to land is the result OF Individual
exeron" Land IL property In tue ordinary sense
Map tho pastoral letter said, Is entitled 10 that o wnon
he is the cause to he improvements he brings
about in it, aud the enjoyment OF both. This w"ui
seem to imply is not entitled TO that OF which
he the producing Man is not the producing
cause OF land certainly and any declaration that Goa
made the earth carries with h the absolute negation OF
the idea that man can obtain the right OF ,diviu
II. !
Go OF the same rights OF ownership tnat properly
attaches things male by has In fact every where
led to the imloveriAbmsnt and ensa' ement OF tne
masses tho deeroration and hnaiIy TO the he>trncon
OF civilization. The hest human reason las M away,
sanctioned the right Of property hut not the rs ~ OF
individual property in lani. Properly In human Deigs
has beeu longer and widely san TONED than private
nrOperty In Land. There Il entail difference be-
tween land and those things rrOducei from Iinh ny
labor to which ndiv ivdua rights OF ownership properly
atrach and was made by Col. Man can neither pro-
dure nor cOnsnme it, On tue other hand the things 10
which the sanctions Ct property rghttny attach whils
... ,n.fp lf.af n ms
land are teir the products OF human laor
They arc rroduce and consumed; they vanlsil rs
the Individual vanishes. WI the earth rernanstn
toreyer The exclusive right 0f ownership to Anything
rroduc-d by human labor is ab-oinro ami rest, on !e
riynt OF each human being 10 the fruits OF his Own
exerons. But THIS right cannot attach To aud lanu
was not made by mAm hut hy Col. . ,.,
rIghI the Improvement made OH lana Is no ilto 10
the sv itself Aud the right of possession that Is eces-
sary to tie full ownership OF mnoveueb can D Sc
cured as well when land Is treated as belon ginR 10
usu'rnct tn the Whule community. as when lana IS
tr, ate OF the absolute property OF the incivhuaL AL
We have TO 10 equal right to and ana Lr ek-
elusive riyhe is to mak- the community
the virtual ground landlord. The value OF any iinirovr
nrnt which a make upon land Is 40 iull az u
that the Stat should take part OF r0m hin
by taxation. Taxes tho making OF wealth. anu tpo
saving wealth should abolished ana put usteau oh
land alone.