The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-01-04

ciple as old a. Moses, who decreed in
Leviticus a rev partition OF the soil
every fifty years, but the Mosaic principle
OF land tenure is no more sound
rule for modern civilization than Mosaic
polygamY is permissible under our modern
Legal or moral code. In India Georges
ideas Of land ownership were inherited by
England. There the state Is proprietor OF
the soil and exacts from the cultivator the
rental value of the land and England has
applied the proceeds of this land rent TO
the government, and yet India, under this
system of land tenure and land taxation,
is one Of the most wretched countries IN
the world. It has been said that George
only follows Herbert Spencer, but this is
mistake. George directly differs with both
Spencer and Mill, for he argues that it
would be unjust to the community to
make any compensation to the owners OF
land dispossessed, while both Spencer and
Mill hold the opposite opinion. Our law
today recognizes that ''the land belongs
TO the people" in the sense that state
may exercise the right of eminent domain
and compel private ownership to yield to
public good, but our law also provides that
private property shall not be taken for
public purposes without just compensa-
ton. Spencer believes in direct tax on
land values as an equitable mode of tax
alton, but he nowhere accepts confisca-
ton of property in land. George believes
in the extremity of paternal government;
in rule by autocracy and bureaucracy,
while Spencer believes in individual effort,
or the government which governs least.
George would greatly enlarge the state civil
service, while Spencer would greatly re-
duce it. George would relax the rule of
the police, while Spencer would have as
many police as are necessary TO make
make life and property safe.
AS war measure only, our government
practically confscated Confederate prop
erty in slaves and land, just as it might
have had JEFF Davis tried and executed by
a military court on his capture, had it not
been zoo wise and humane TO do it; that is,
if we had been disposed to push our war
powers TO the edge of extreme severity, We
could have tried and shot jeff Davis as
promptly as the Mexican General Esco-
bedo did Emperor Macmillan and Gen.
eral Miramon in 1867. Working men of
intelligence soon saw that under Georges
scheme, which imposes all the taxes on the
land and no tax on buildings, that the mill
ionaire's palace would be equally exempt
with the peasants cot, which would in
effect rob the poor to help the rich. The
house that cost million pays no tax,
while the lot on which it stands pays no
more tax than a similar lot owned by a
mechanic. OF course this would result in
the confscation of all small properties and
the concentration of all real estate in the
hands of the most wealthy, for only the
large buildings could pay the land tax.
Those able to build the most expensive
structures would be able to endure the tax
that would mean confscation to q poor
house and landhelder.
This particular weakness of Georges
machinery was the death of his party in
New York city, but his paternalism,
which would take all natural and neces-
sary monopolies, like telegraphs, railroads,
etc, out of private hands and have them
owned or controlled by the government,
continues to crop forth in all the public
creed of the Farmers Alliance and Peo-
pies Party. This kind of paternalism
would immensely swell the volume of gov
eminent patronage. The passage of Sem
ator Sawyer's postal telegraph bill by the
last congress would have added 100000
persons TO the civil service, while govern
ment control of railroads would mean to-
day an army of more than million office
holders, with a sure increase every year.
OF course, as Senator Carlisle pointed out
to the Peoples Party, we could not afford
to nationalize railroads at the cost Of
$4,000, 100000 and o million of additional
offic e-holders.