Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1891-10-08
SINGLE TAX DEPARTMENT.
GUT The GIVES.

tempt of DR. ]. NJ. Buckley, editor of
the Christian Advocate, to answer Off
hand conglonerate list of questions
almost cyclopedic in their range, Illus
trates the folly of this kind of per-
Torrance for any other purpose than
that of amusing a thoughtless audience
DR.. Buckley answered two of the eues-
tions correctly. He said that the first
circulating library in America was
founded by Benjamin Franklin, and
that he didn't know who was the man
with the iron mask. If the other re-
plies were trustworthy it was accident
al, for they gave but little evidence of
research, and none of thoughtfulness.
The one regarding which it is our duty
to speak is as strange a mixture, moral
", logically and economically, as a
man of such reputation as teacher
could be expected to concoct.
Asked whether the single tax would
abolish poverty, DR.. Buckley replied
that it would not, because it makes no
provision for the taxation of personal
property, and leaves no stimulus to the
poor man to work for shelter for HIM
self in life and for his wife and children
should he be called away. How the
taxation of personal property, which is
produced by work and only by work,
can benefit men who live by working,
Dr. Buckley did not explain. He could
not He simply undertook to teach re-
garding a subject to which he had given
no adequate thought. Nor did he ask
himself why, though able and willing
to work, poor men are now unable to
get homes Being informed that the
value of lot for which he paid 81, 600,
and Oh which his own home stands,
would disappear under the single tax,
his mind was impervious to the thought
that if the single tax had been in vogue
when he built his home, he would not
have been obliged to pay such sum
for piece of Gods earth on which to
build it. Neither did he consider that
with the future incoming of the single
tax his children and his brothers chill
dren would be exempt from such ex-
tortion. Had he done SO, he would
have seen that the single tax, so far
from preventing home building, will
promote it. His thoughtlessness is the
more astonishing when considered in
the light of the words with which he
began his reply. He said
/ firmly believe that the present sys-
tenn is not in harmony with either PHI
losophy or religion. When | was born
into the world every square foot of land
was held in private ownership by some
one else | came into the world handl-
CAPPED. The land was all held in pri-
vate ownership by some one else, and
it was, or had been, owned by uncon-
scious infants, who never lifted hand
or did a stroke of work; and this same
thing goes on all the time, and from
generation to generation,
One would suppose that a moral
teacher, inspired with this idea, would
not sleep for thinking of how most
quickly to abolish so great an injustice.
But Dr. Buckley's sleep was not dis
turbed. Offering no remedy himself,
he rejected the only one that is offered,
because it would confscate land values.
That is to say, if he had the slightest
apprehension of the terms he used, be-
cause it would prevent owners OF land
from levying private tribute upon users
of land.
If some one owned taxing franchise,
say of 10 per cent. on the annual pro-
duction of given community, Dr.
Buckley would object to taking away
or otherwise abolishing this franchise,
because that would destroy its value
would prevent the owner from contln-
uing or empowering another to con-
tinue the extortion. If it were slave,
DR. Buckley would object to freeing
him, because that would destroy his
value to the slave owner-would pre-
vent the slave owner from appropriate
inc the result of the slaves labor.
That we do not Elisrepresent DIR.
Buckley, nor even exaggerate his men
tai and moral confusion, seems clear
from his response to a suggestion that
it would be no more unjust to deprive
him of the value of his land than to free
his slave had he invested his $1,000 in
that kind of "property." Here it is:
''We do not set the slaves free under
ordinary circumstances. If 1T had not
been for the Southerners firing on Fort
Sumter the slaves would not have
been freed as they were; but slavery
would have been abolished by the
people coming together and making
some kind of an adjustment. The Re
publican party never dared to take
ground in favor of the absolute aboli-
ton of slavery; the only ground that
they dared to take was that slavery
should not be carried into the terri
tories. If it had not been for the war
the anti-slavery sentiment would have
developed until there would have been
some sort of a compromise devised 50
that their slaves would not have been
taken away from them without some
compensation.
Let it be remembered that DIR. Buck
lev is not considering compensation as
cheaper or otherwise more expedient
than abolition. He is considering the
Justice of abolition. And his own
words leave no other inference than
that in his opinion, it is more in har-
rnony with justice to continue slavery
until compromise can be effected I'M
der which masters will be compensated
for the loss of what in justice they can
not own, than to abolish slavery re-
gardless of the interest of masters. In
other words, the legally purchased
power of one man to levy tribute upon
another is more sacred than the natural
right of every man to retain the pro-
duets of his own labor.
1t NAV be inferred however, as DR.
Buckley uses the following illustration,
that the question of expediency, rather
than that of justice, was, after all, the
principal one in his mind and we quote
it for whatever in that respect it may
be worth:
ut is a bad thing for a man to be
that 6oaS not