The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1894-12-12


the taxes equal to one-third of the
crop, and then the tenant can buy the
land and pay that one-third in taxes. !"
But, wherein would he be any better
OF? Suppose that the one-third of the
crop is equal to $500, and he now pays
that for rent to the landlord. wherein
will he be any better off to make him
pay that $500 in taxes to the govern
ment: Isn't it as broad as it is long?
Isn't it six of one and half-a-dozen
Of the other?
But" say Mr.. George, 1--WE propose
to remove all the taxes from improve
ments and put them on the land"
Well, let us see. Here is town lot
worth $4,000 with building on it
worth $4,000 more; and we will say the
tax now is 5000. The single tax pre-
walls and the $1OO tax on the building
is taken off the building and put on
the lot, and so the building goes free
and the lot is taxed 5000; and the
owner pays just as much as he did be-
fore! 1t is like the boy who was rid
ing home from mill on his old horse
Dobbin, with a sack of flour in front
of him. "What a shame" he saws, "to
make poor Dobbin carry me and the
flour both; will help him." and so he
puts the sack of flour on his own
shoulders-and Dobbin's load is just
what it was before!
"But," says the single-taxer, "we
will make the tax on that town-lot
bigger than it was before.-we'll
double it," What then? The owner
increases his rent accordingly;-all
the other owners do the same;-and
all the tenants add the increased rent
to the prices of what they have to sell;
and the whole tax,-now borne
largely by railroads and banks and
capitalists,-is then shOuldered upon
the common people;-and the bigger
family man has the more he pays;-
and so while trying to encourage the
raising of buildings we discourage the
raising of children.
But in the last two hundred years
the taxes on lots in New York have
increased probably one hundred fold
in amount. Did you ever hear of the
owners of any of that property coming
up and relinquishing it because of the
increased tax? No; they increased
the price and the rent. With farm
land it is different. 1t is worth sub
stantially what it will produce. The
farmer cannot increase the price of
his productions to meet additional
gage would soon be shifted upon the
towns people who eat the farmers
products. But the whole world enters
into the making of the farmers
prices.
But why should agriculture be made
to bear all the burdens of govern
ment, and all other forms of wealth
be allowed to go scott-free? Can any
one give reason? Would it not make
the farmer even more than now the
bond-slave of capital? Would not the
wealthy classes grin, as they saw the
poor wretches struggling under such
crushing burdens, while they paid
nothing? Would it not be a banquet
of delights to invite the landless to?
Is it any wonder that capitalists, like
John S. Pillsbury, are in favor of the
slngle-tax theory? 1t makes one laugh
to think of it.
But it will be said,-Is there no
remedy for the evils complained of?
No 10; ;p1r hof xx,ifh ~
around Robin. Hoods barn.
If you have the power to pass sim
gle tax law you have the power to pass
any other equally radical law.
If there is ownership of land by
aliens, absolutely prohibit it. Confis-
cate the land and let actual settlers
take it.
Pass a national law that no man
shall own any part of the earth's sur
face, in this country, unless he uses
and occupies it. In other words pro-
hibit speculative ownership of land fit
for settlement. GIVE the present
owners year or two in which to sell
out to actual occupants, and let them
invest their money in something else.
Instead of increasing the burdens
on the farmers, do as they have done
in New Zealand. The constitution OF
Minnesota now eXempts, (Sec. 3, Art.
IN), 5000 worth of personal property,
of each individual, from taxation. In.
crease that to $500 or $1,000, and make
it apply to real estate as we'll as per
sonal. This will be grand protection
for farmers and mechanics and all
who have little. The deficit could be
made up by state graduated income
taX or by increased taxation of corpo-
rations. He that has most should pay
| most.
Then let the working people de-
mand 'home law" as a supplement
to the homestead law. The latter
gave men only the bare ground. Let
the state or nation condemn a large
tract of land near each of the big
cities: cut it up into acre lots; sell
them to the working people at cost,
on twenty or fifty years time; build
them houses upon them; help the
workmen through the first year OF
two Of struggle; collect the interest,
g per cent per annum), through the
taxes; build an electric line, to be oacned