The Louisiana Democrat., 1891-11-25
VOL. XLVI.-NO. 48.


Justly belongs to him; in one short pus
expressive word, it is robbery.
It lis unjust and unequal in its opera
tions: it makes the rich richer, and the
poor poorer.
It enables the wealth of the country
to shift all the burdens OF the govern
meut on to the shoulders OF the farmer
and the laborer.
1t puts fine on industry, enterprise
and thrift, and premium on ldleness'
laziness and shiftlessness.
1t taxes people on what they con-
sumo and not on what they have
1t d;scourages and resards improve
ments.
1t limits and restricts the production
of wealth.
1t increases the cost of all the neces'
saries and luxurics of life.
It is the parent OF monopoly, and the
fruitful source Of the inequality which
produces poverty with all its attendant
evils. g
My friend, in the article before re-
ferred to- says if man towns $40, 00o,-
600, and it is necessary to levy live
mills, he should pay $50, 900; If he only
owns $500, he should pay $3.50" Has
it ever occurred to my good brother
that if a man is worth $40, 900, 900 his
wealth must largely consist ofzvalua-
BILE lands, or other forms of property
based on land values, and that, under
the present system of collecting taxes,
he is able to shift every dollar of his
$50, 900 of taxes onto the producers OF
wealth, who, in addition to paying the
taxes of the millionaire, must also
pay him for the privilege of working?
But by far the greater part of the
taxes collected from the people are
taxes on consumption, and the govern
ment takes in taxes from the mass OF
workers about all they make above
bare subsistence.
The effect of shifting all taxes to
land values would be cheaper land and
reduced rent. 1t would destroy land
speculation, and lands now idle and
vacant would be cultivated and i'm
proved; instead of the tillers of the soil
bearing all the burdens of the govern.
ment, as they do to-day, the bulk Of
the taxes would be paid by the owners
or users of valuable lands in the towns
and cities, and the owners of mining
and timber lands that now pay little OF
no taxes. We are not proposing to tax
land in proportion to its area, but ac-
cording to its value; and if those who
raise the cry that ''the single tax will
put all the taxes on the farmers" will
stop and think moment, they will sec
that the "tillers of the soil," about
whom they profess SO much solicitude.
do not own the valuable land in this
country, and therefore they could not
be made to bear all the burdens, nor.
indeed, any considerable share.
Under the single tax it would be inn
possible for this to be n ''land of land
lords and tenants but if the present
methods are allowed to obtain for q
few years longer, it is inevitably bound
to become such. ..s
Under the single tax, men could not
grow rich by holding land out of use,
for speculation; neither could they
grow rich by charging other people rent
for the use of land, thereby appropri-
ating their earnings without rendering
an equivalent
Then all land would be put toits best
use, and every individual would simply
pay to the community the annual rent
al value for SO much of the common
property as he could profitably use,
and in this way restore to the COM
munity those values which are created
by the community.
The Farmers alliance has adopted as
its shibboleth and battle-cry these
words of Thomas jefferson: Equal
rights for all; special privileges to
none" and if it be the purpose of the
farmers of the United States, who too
long have been "hewers of wood and
drawers of water" for monopolies Of
all kinds, to crystalize that glorious
sentiment of pure democracy into the
legislation of this country, there is no
other way on earth nor among men by
which it can be done, except by first
adopting the single tax.-H Martin
| Williams.