Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1891-09-03
SINGLE TAX DEPARTMENT.
THE RIGHT TO THE USE or THE
EARTH.

Ey IlSrDerS sprncHC.
fReport OF Chapter TX, of Social States.

tReport OF Chapter TX, of Social Statics."y
CONTINUED FROM LAST WEEK.
5. 1t does indeed at first sight seem pos
sible for the earth to become the exclu-
sive possession of individuals by some
process of equitable distribution.
Why" it may be asked, should not
men agree to a fair subdivision? If all
are co-heirs, why may not the estate be
equally apportioned, and each be after
ward perfect master of his own share?'
To this question it may in the first
place be replied that such division is
vetoed by the difficulty of fix
ing the value of respective tracts of
land. Variations in productiveness, diff
ferent degrees of accessibility. advan-
tages of climate, proximity to the CEN
tiers of civilization-these, and other
such considerations. remove the prob
lem out Of the sphere of mere mensura-
ton into the region of impossibility.
Bat, waving this, let us inquire who
are to be the allotees. Shall adult males
and all who have reached twenty-one
on n specified day be the fortunate in
dividuals? II SO, what is to be done
with those who come of age on to-mor-
row? Is it proposed that each man,
woman and child shall have section?
If so, what is to become of those who
are to tie born next year? And what
will be the fate of those whose fathers
sell their estates and squander the pro
ceeds? These portionless ones must
constitute class already described as
having no right to a resting place on
earth-as living by the sutferance of
their fellow men-as being practically
serfs. And the existence of such class
is wholly at variance with the law of
equal freedom.
Until, therefore, we can produce
valid commission authorizing us to
make this distribution-until it can be
proved that God has given one charter of
privileges to one generation and anoth-
er to the next-until we can demon
strate that men born after a certain
date are doomed to slavery, we must
consider that no such allotment is per-
missible.
6. Probably some will regard the diff
ficulties inseparable from individual
ownership of the soil, as caused by
pushing to excess doctrine applica bic
only within rational limits This is a
very favorite style of thinking with
some. There are people who hate any
| thing in the shape of exact conclusions;
| and these are of them. According to
such the right is never in either ex-
| IRENE, but always half way between
the extremes. They are continually
trying to reconcile yes and no. Ifs and
butts and excerpts are their delight
| They have so great a faith in 1.-The jul
dicious mean" that they would scarcely
believe an oracle if it uttered a full
length principle. Were you to inquire
| of them whether the earth turns on its
| axis from east to west or from west to
east, you might almost expect the re-
| ply: "A little of both" or Not exact
ly either" 1t is doubtful whether they
would assent to the axiom that the
whole is greater than its part, without
making some qualification. They have
| p passion for COMPROMISES. To meet
their taste truth must always be spiced
| with q little error. They can not con-
ceive of a pure, definite, entire and I'M
limited law. And hence, in discussions
like the present, they are constantly
| petitionine for NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
wishing to abate, and modify, and mod,
erate-ever protesting against doctrines
being pursued to their ultimate conse
| quences.
But it behooves such to recollect that
ethicals truth is as exact and as pen
emptory as physical truth: and that il
this matter of land tenure the verdict
of morality must be distinctly yea OF
nav. Either men have right to make
the soil private property or they have
not. There is no medium. We mus
choose one of the two positions. There
can be no half-and-half opinion. In the
nature of things the fact must be either
one way or the other
If men have not such a right, we are
at once delivered from the severe pre-
dicaments already pointed out. 1t they
have such a right, then is that right alb
solutely sacred, not on any pretense t.
be violated. If they have such ;
right then is his grace of Iced
justified in warning off tourist
] from Ben Mac DUH, the duke of Athol
} in closing Glen Tilt, the duke of Buc
: cleugh in denying sites to the Ere
church and the duke of Sutherland II
banishing the Highlanders to maxi
room for sheep walks If they hav
such right, then it would be prope
for the sole proprietor of any kingdom
"a Jersey or Guernsey, for example
to impose just what regulations h
might choose on its inhabitants-to tel
them that they should not live on hi
: property unless they protested certain
religion, spoke particular language
and paid him a specified reverence
adopted an authorized dress and con
formed to all other conditions he nigh
see fit to make. If they have such
, ripht. then is there truth in that tene
? OF the ultra tory school, that the Ian
owners are the only legitimate ruler
3 of country-that the people at larg
, remain in it only by the land owner:
permission, and ought consequently t
submit to the land owners rule, an
respect whatever institutions the Ian
owners set up There is no escap
{ from these differences. They are neces
sarv corollaries to the theory that tn
= earth can become individual property
1 And they can only be repudiated by dc
3 nying that theory.
Z. After all, nobody does implicit
. believe in landlordism. We hear Of es
. tates being held under the king-tha
, is, the state; or of their being kept /
, trust for the public benefit; and nc
: that they are the inalienable posse:
sions of their nominal owners. More
t over, we daily deny landlordism by on
d legislation Is a canal, railway or
turnpike road to be made, we do nc
g scruple to seize just as many acres
NAV be requisite, allowing the holder
COMPENSATION for the capital invested
n MT r