The Monitor. [volume] (Woodstown, N.J.) 1884-1892, 1891-12-18

" 10 eH1 S4Sot64 HiDHgs continuing
private property in land and thus main.
tanning the universal law Of nature. the
right of man to all be can honestly secure.
as the common and accepted law deter.
mines honesty, or inaugurating a system
OF extreme justice and attempting by NOR.
tai means to recast human nature.
The theory of simple land taxation IL in
applicable because it is contrary to present
laws aud ideas, and unpopular with all
save a few of socialistic tendencies. After
a system of government and a course of
customs has been in operation for an ex-
tended period, and has been sanctioned by
those by whom and over whom such a gov
eminent is operated, it requires a great
power to sabvert it and to reconstruct it
after some new theory in violent opposition
to the current idea, and nothing less than
an Eruption of some foreign power, or
some great revolution in popular thought
can accomplish it. In the case of an
autoeracy, or a monarchy, where great
power is lodged in the ruling authorities,
such changes may be made without any
great popular demonstration; but 10 a rep
resentative government, such as the Unit
ed States. revolutions Of society are neees-
sarily based on the opinion of the people.
The first thing to be done, then, in an at
tempt to i%naugurate q new system of
things, is to appeal to the popular mind.
To do this the proposed change must APP
pear practicable, must guarantee q better
state of affairs to the majority. and must
be presented by men in whom the people
have confidence. Unless a new theory has
some or all of these features, it's doom is
f~oreordained. The single tax system
seems TO have but one OF these features to
commend it to the consideration Of the
American people, an advocate of true and
practicable because it is contrary to the
interests Of the most powerful others;
ard. as it strikes directly at wealth, its sue
cess is deprecated by all persons of wealth
in proportion to their possessions. It's
popularity, on which it must base its pre-
tentions, can uevei be established for the
reason that it is a scheme entailing az sue
cess disadvantages on the majority of tue
population, dispossesslng many Of their
property, burdening others with increased
taxes. and necessitating a nicely Of dis
elimination in judging of The relative val
ues of land such as would be next to im-
possible, and be the source Of litigation
W ithout end. The system has nothing TO
commend it to consideration except the
possibility of alternating the poor, and eveu
this phiianthropie side of the question is
outweighed by the sacrifices which it
must necessarily involve. It viii naturally
obtain most Of its support from those who,
unfortunate or shiftless themsel. aaok
with jealousy upon wealth aud iuxury,44G
gladly favor any plan, Lowevor unreasona-
bic or extreme, that promises an equal
distribution of this coveted wealth. The
Socialists Will advocate the single land tax
system, but this fact instead Of giving it
strength i'll rather serve as a stigma upon
the HhoIe movement. Since the outbreak
of the Anarchists in Chicago. the Ameri-
cans have had little sympathy with Anar-
chism or its kindred idea Socialism, aud
the tendency of a theory to this end is sufi-
cient to ostracize it from American notions.
1t is not to be supposed, however. that Mr..
George, or the theory he advocates, is 10 any
way allied or connected with the commonly
conceived idea of Socialism. Yet the sys
TEN may become the instrument through
which men of less patriotism and less
integrity may work out their nefarious
purpose for the snbye:sion OF all law aud
the accom- lisbment ofeyil ends.
The application of this remedy would
not destroy all inequality, nor guarantee
an equal distribution Of wealth.
As long as humanity remains there will
be the rich and the poor, the successful
and the unsuccessful. No mere change of
institutions will dispel these discrepancies;
the secret lies deeper, involving the char
acter and nature Of the individual. No
system of laws, however perfect, will
regulate the divergence of thought or
direct the diversity of action 50 that one
man may not secure more of the wealth Of
the world than another. As two tress
standing side By side and rooted in the
same soil will differ in production, so will
men with the same Surroundings aud un-
der the same laws differ in prosperity. The
system of private property in land is not
the cause Of all the misery Of the world,
nor will its abolition produce such a
milleniun as the advocates Of the single
tax theory assert. Private property in
land has always been the outgrowih Of
higher civilization.
Mr.. George 10 hls Progress and Power
ty" alludes to the laws OF Lyeurgus and
the Spartan government, and asserts that
The final triumph Of the tendency to private
property ia land was the destruction Of
| Greece. An equal division of the Spartan
lands was not the only act Of Lyourgns;
nor was it the principal cause Of Spartan
prosperity. The most powerful feature in
the government Of Lyeurgus was the stern
education it provided fer the youth. And
ii was to the neglect Of this feature more
than to the triumph Of the tendency OF